How Long Will A 100Ah Battery Last?
Source: Learn Metrics | author unknown
100Ah batteries are quite big. They can be used for RV, as solar batteries, or even car batteries. You can imagine that one of the most frequent questions regarding the 100 amp hours batteries is this one:
“How long will a 100Ah battery last?”
This can be quite easily calculated if you understand the basic electric power law:
Power (W) = Current (I) × Voltage (V)
0 of 34 secondsVolume 0%
A 100Ah battery can last anywhere from 120 hours (running a 10W appliance) to 36 minutes (running a 2,000W appliance). 100Ah 12V battery has a capacity of 1.2 kWh; that’s more than 2% of the capacity of the Tesla Model 3 car battery. You can check here how long does charging Tesla cars with much bigger batteries last here.
As you can see, how long will a 100 amp hour battery last depends primarily on how powerful the appliance you’re running. To fully answer how long will a 100Ah battery last, we will first look at how much capacity (or juice; in terms of Wh or Watt-hours) 100Ah 12V battery has.
We will also illustrate how you can calculate how long will a 100Ah battery run any appliance. On top of that, you will also find a ‘100Ah Battery Life Calculator‘ further on that makes all these calculations effortless.
Screenshot of the calculator: You just insert wattage and the calculator returns how many hours will a 100Ah battery last. You can use the calculator yourself further on.
Near the end, we also solve two real-life examples just to illustrate how you can use the calculator. These are:
Example 1: How long will a 100Ah battery run an appliance that requires 400W?
Example 2: How long will a 100Ah battery run an appliance that requires 100W?
The goal here is that once you finish this article, you will be able to determine how long will a 100Ah battery last yourself for any appliance.
Let’s start with looking at how much juice the 100Ah battery has:
100Ah Battery Capacity (In Terms Of Wh)
For starters, we need to determine how much electricity is in the 100Ah battery. Some might say, “It’s a 100Ah battery, that’s your capacity right there.”
Well, it’s not all that simple. “100Ah” only tells us the amount of electrical current the battery can provide. For example, a 100Ah battery can provide us with 100 amps current for 1 hour. It can also provide us with a 1 amp current for 100h.
To get to electrical capacity (or power, according to the P = I × V), we need to know the voltage as well.
Now, almost all batteries have a 12V output voltage. It doesn’t matter if you have a 100Ah lithium battery, 100Ah deep-cycle battery, or 100Ah LiFePO4 battery; all of them run on 12 volts or 12V.
With these two key metrics – 100Ah and 12V – we can precisely calculate how much electrical capacity (measured in Wh) a 100Ah battery actually has. Here is the equation we use:
Battery Capacity or Watt-Hours (Wh) = Amp-Hours (Ah) × Voltage (V)
In the case of a 100Ah 12V battery, we get:
100Ah 12V Battery Capacity = 100Ah × 12V = 1,200Wh
Now, this 1,200Wh battery capacity is the most useful piece of information when it comes to determining how long will a 100Ah battery last. It has 1.2 kWh of juice; for comparison, Tesla S model has a 100 kWh battery.
Here are just a few examples of how long will such a 100Ah battery run different appliances:
100Ah battery will run a 1,200W appliance for 1 hour.
100Ah battery will run a 600W appliance for 2 hours.
100Ah battery will run a 400W appliance for 3 hours.
100Ah battery will run a 100W appliance for 12 hours.
100Ah battery will run a 1W appliance for 1,200 hours.
How did we calculate these times? Here is the simple equation pretty much everybody can use, together with the ‘100Ah Battery Life Calculator’:
100Ah Battery Life Calculator
Here’s how you look at this:
You have an appliance you want to run. Let’s say a 100W television.
You have a 100Ah battery. It has a capacity of 1,200Wh.
When will the battery run out of juice? Here’s how you calculate that:
100Ah Battery Run Time = Battery Capacity / Appliance Wattage
In our case, this is:
100Ah Battery Run Time = 1,200Wh / 100W = 12 Hours
Simple, right?
We even simplified it by designing an easy-to-use ‘100Ah Battery Life Calculator’. You can insert the wattage of the appliance you want to run, and the calculator will dynamically tell you how long will a 100Ah last.
Using the calculator, you can determine how long any appliance will run on 100Ah 12V battery. If you need a running time for 200Ah batteries, you can use this similar 200Ah battery run time calculator.
You can also use this calculated chart of long will 100Ah battery power different appliances:
[Appliance Power Draw (Watts); How Long Will 100Ah Battery Last] : [10W 120 Hours], 20W 60 Hours, 30W 40 Hours, 40W 30 Hours, 50W 24 Hours, 100W 12 Hours, 150W 8 Hours; 200W 6 Hours, 250W 4.80 Hours, 300W 4 Hours, 350W 3.43 Hours, 400W 3 Hours, 450W 2.67 Hours, 500W 2.4 Hours, 600W 2 Hours, 700W 1.71 Hours, 800W 1.5 Hours, 900W 1.33 Hours, 1,000W 1.2 Hours, 1,100W 1.09 Hours, 1,200W 1 Hour, 1,300W 0.92 Hours or 55 Minutes, 1,400W 0.86 Hours or 52 Minutes, 1,500W 0.8 Hours or 48 Minutes, 2,000W 0.6 Hours or 36 Minutes
To illustrate how easy it is to manually calculate these times, we will solve two promised examples:
How Long Will A 100Ah Battery Run An Appliance That Requires 400W? (Example 1)
A lot of people who own RVs or caravans are interested in how long will a 100Ah battery last if you run a 400W appliance with it.
If you’re looking at 100Ah alone, it’s impossible to figure it out.
However, when you calculate the battery capacity of 100Ah and get 1,200Wh, you can quickly figure out how long the battery will last:
You have a 1,200Wh battery.
Appliance draws 400W.
You simply divide 1,200Wh by 400W and get 3 hours.
In short, a 100Ah 12V battery will run a 400W appliance for 3 hours.
How Long Will A 100Ah Battery Run An Appliance That Requires 100W? (Example 2)
The same principle applies here. We already know that a 100Ah battery will run a 100W appliance for 12 hours.
That’s because we know two metrics that make this calculation possible:
You have a 1,200Wh battery.
Appliance draws 100W.
Dividing 1,200Wh by 100W yields the result: 12h.
We hope that now everybody can calculate how long will a 100 amp-hours battery last.
Electric Cars Are Taking Off, but When Will Battery Recycling Follow?
Electric Cars Are Taking Off, but When Will Battery Recycling Follow?
Many companies and investors are eager to recycle batteries, but it could take a decade or more before enough used lithium-ion batteries become available.
Source: New York Times | By Niraj Chokshi and Kellen Browning
Niraj Chokshi and Kellen Browning reported this story from Reno, Nev. Chokshi also traveled to Rochester, N.Y., and Browning to Adelanto, Calif.
Dec. 21, 2022
Benjamin Reynaga used power tools to hack his way into a beat-up hybrid Honda Fit at an auto dismantling plant at the edge of the Mojave Desert until he reached the most important part of the car: its lithium-ion battery.
The vehicle itself was set to be crushed, but the battery would be treated with care. It would be disassembled nearby and then sent to Nevada, where another company, Redwood Materials, would recover some of the valuable metals inside.
The plant where Mr. Reynaga works, in Adelanto, Calif., is at the front lines of what auto industry experts, environmentalists and the Biden administration believe could be an important part of a global shift to electric vehicles: recycling and reusing metals like cobalt, lithium and nickel. If batteries past their prime supply the ingredients for new ones, electric cars, trucks and vans would become more affordable and environmentally sustainable.
Cars and trucks, either at the end of their functional lives or damaged from accidents, sit at the LKQ plant before being recycled for parts.Credit...Gabriella Angotti-Jones for The New York Times
“We’re just getting ready,” said Nick Castillo, who manages the plant for LKQ Corporation. The facility mostly dismantles gasoline vehicles but is preparing to take apart more hybrid and electric vehicles. “We know it’s eventually going to take over — it’s going to be the future.”
Sales of electric cars and trucks are taking off, and the auto and battery industries are investing billions of dollars to upgrade and build factories. These cars could help address climate change, but batteries pose their own problems. Raw materials can be hard to mine, are often found in countries with poor human rights records and require processing that leaves behind noxious waste.
Fortunately, those battery ingredients are also highly reusable. And now a race is on to collect and recycle used lithium-ion batteries. Venture capitalists, automakers and energy companies are pouring money into dozens of start-up recycling companies in North America and Europe.
But for all the optimism, this new business faces a daunting challenge: Few batteries will be available to recycle for a decade or more. Tesla, which dominates the electric vehicle business, began selling cars in 2008 and until 2017 sold fewer than 100,000 cars a year. There are other sources to recycle today, including hybrids and consumer electronics, but the supply is limited and collection can be challenging.
That has left recycling companies in a difficult position. They need to invest in factories, machinery and workers or risk losing ground to competitors. But if they invest too quickly, they could run out of money before lots of aging batteries arrive at their loading docks.
“You have people that are just burning through money, because you don’t have the feed stock to be able to make the material to sell,” said Eric Frederickson, the managing director of operations for Call2Recycle, a nonprofit program that helps recyclers find old batteries.
The companies also have to figure out how to find, collect and dismantle batteries. They have to work with many dismantlers, scrap yards and nonprofit groups. And because batteries are prone to fires and packaged and built differently from model to model, taking them apart can be complicated and dangerous.
Among companies recycling batteries, Redwood stands out. The company was founded by J.B. Straubel, a former top Tesla executive, and has raised more than $1 billion from investors, it said. Redwood sees itself primarily as a producer of battery materials — made from recovered or mined metals — and has established recycling partnerships with Ford Motor, Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo. Redwood also recycles scrap from a battery plant run by Panasonic and Tesla, near Reno, Nev.
On a flat, dusty tract of land near that plant, Redwood is building out a 175-acre campus. There, the company recovers metal from old batteries and produces materials for new ones. Redwood announced last week that it would spend at least $3.5 billion on another campus in South Carolina, in a region of the country that is fast becoming a hub for battery and electric vehicle production.
Batteries have an anode and a cathode, which contains most of a battery’s valuable metal. When a battery is used, lithium ions move from the anode to the cathode. The flow is reversed while charging.
Image
Cathode material compressed into a large block is stored on pallets at Li-Cycle in Rochester, N.Y.Credit...Libby March for The New York Times
Image
Anode material that is also compressed into large blocks at Li-Cycle.Credit...Libby March for The New York Times
Most anodes and cathodes come from China, but Redwood hopes to change that. At the Nevada facility, the company is making thin anode foil using recycled copper. Redwood also plans to make cathode materials there using recycled cobalt and a mix of recycled and mined lithium and nickel. Panasonic recently said it planned to use Redwood’s products in its batteries at two U.S. factories.
Redwood regularly receives used batteries and scrap from suppliers like LKQ and partners like Panasonic. Some of that material is first heated at low temperatures in a proprietary process. All batteries go through chemical baths and other processes to isolate and extract specific metals.
Redwood buys virgin metal because there aren’t enough old batteries and scrap. But mining and transporting can be carbon-intensive and subject to supply chain problems, so the company’s executives said they were eager to use more recovered metals.
“We want to take in as much recycled content as we can because it’s an available feedstock that’s local,” said Kevin Kassekert, Redwood’s chief operating officer. “But we will have to augment that.”
Image
Storage at Li-Cycle’s plant in Rochester. The company is focused on recycling.Credit...Libby March for The New York Times
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
Other businesses are focused solely on recycling. Li-Cycle, a Canadian company founded in 2016 by two former engineering consultants — Ajay Kochhar and Tim Johnston — is building several plants.
At collection centers in Alabama, Arizona, New York and Ontario, the company breaks down batteries and manufacturing scrap. In its plant in Rochester, N.Y., a conveyor belt ferries materials up one story before dropping them into a vat where they are shredded while submerged in a proprietary chemical solution to prevent fires.
Image
Discarded cell batteries await processing at Li-Cycle.Credit...Libby March for The New York Times
Image
A conveyor belt carries batteries to be recycled into reusable material at Li-Cycle.Credit...Libby March for The New York Times
The resulting pieces are separated, and Li-Cycle then harvests a granular substance, known as black mass, which is processed into its component metals elsewhere. But Li-Cycle plans a total capital investment of about $485 million to build a facility, also in Rochester, to turn the substance into battery-grade lithium, cobalt and nickel.
Li-Cycle, which became a publicly traded company in 2021, said it had more than 100 battery suppliers, including a partnership with Ultium Cells, a joint venture between General Motors and the South Korean battery company LG Energy Solution. Li-Cycle also has strategic partnerships with the mining giant Glencore and Koch Industries, the privately held conglomerate with extensive fossil fuel operations. Together, those two businesses have invested $300 million in Li-Cycle.
“We were fortunate that we took the path that we did, when we did,” Mr. Kochhar said. “This is an industry that does require, just like battery making, a good amount of capital.”
Battery recycling is still relatively new in North America, but more mature companies abroad could provide a hint of what’s to come. In China, for example, there are many recyclers but a shortage of material.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
“They have too much capacity and too few batteries to recycle,” said Hans Eric Melin, who founded Circular Energy Storage, a consulting firm that specializes in the market for old lithium-ion batteries. “I think that’s exactly the situation that we will face in both Europe and North America.”
It could take many years for recycling to become a thriving industry in the United States. Relatively few electric vehicles are on the road, and most are new. Smartphones, laptops and other electronics also contain lithium-ion batteries, but they are difficult to collect and there are not enough to meet the growing needs of the auto industry.
But lawmakers and environmental groups want recycling to take off quickly to cut carbon emissions, protect the nation from an overreliance on foreign producers and promote the safe disposal of batteries.
The Inflation Reduction Act signed by President Biden over the summer, for example, requires a growing share of a battery’s valuable minerals to be sourced domestically or from a trade ally before vehicles qualify for tax credits. And the European Union appears close to requiring a minimum amount of recycled content in all electric vehicle batteries.
For now, recyclers are focused on collecting factory-floor scrap.
Massive battery plants are being spun up around the world, including many in the United States. Those factories could provide the recyclers with a great deal of defective or excess battery material, particularly in their early years.
“There are always inevitable losses along the process of creating a cell for a lithium ion battery,” said Sarah Colbourn, a research analyst at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. “Because of that, there’s really an opportunity to recycle that waste.”
Such scrap will account for about 78 percent of recyclable materials globally in 2025 and remain the main source for recyclers until the mid-2030s, when used batteries take over, according to a recent report by Ms. Colbourn.
But recycling those dead batteries won’t be easy. Collecting scrap is relatively simple. Similar materials from factories are processed in batches. Used batteries come in different shapes and sizes.
Standardized designs and construction methods could help, but most auto and battery companies have shown little interest in that. Instead, they are working on different approaches as they compete to make cars that can travel farther on a charge.
In March, as Redwood prepared to move into the larger campus near Reno, workers at a smaller plant in nearby Carson City were busy processing used consumer electronics. Some sorted through large bins of batteries from power tools, laptops and other devices, while others oversaw conveyor belts dumping batteries into rotating bins to be heated and broken down.
Heath Millim, a Redwood employee, shovels discarded batteries while two other employees sort the battery types in Redwood’s plant in Carson City, Nev.Credit...Nina Riggio for The New York Times
“There’s an opportunity for us to revolutionize how material is recovered and sent back into the supply chain on the E.V. side,” Mr. Kassekert, the Redwood executive, said. “A metal atom can be recycled an infinite amount of times — it’s just a matter of how do you get it efficiently.”
After years of losing ground to China, U.S. and European executives and lawmakers are optimistic that battery recycling can quickly help establish a domestic battery industry. But they may be in for a rude awakening, said Mr. Melin, the consultant.
Electric vehicle batteries can last 15 to 20 years. Even then, many batteries will find second lives — to store wind and solar energy for use when it’s not windy or sunny, for example — before they are recycled.
“There won’t be a lot of material to recycle for a long time,” Mr. Melin said. “And that is obviously a positive thing because the main reason is that the batteries are in the cars.”
More Than 400,000 Solar-Powered Umbrellas Recalled Over Fire Risk
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled the umbrellas, which were sold at Costco, because of the risk of lithium-ion batteries overheating.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recalled the umbrellas, which were sold at Costco, because of the risk of lithium-ion batteries overheating.
The SunVilla Solar LED Market Umbrella has been recalled because lithium-ion batteries in its solar panels can overheat, posing fire and burn hazards.
Source: New York Times | By April Rubin
June 26, 2022
The authorities have recalled more than 400,000 solar-powered umbrellas sold at Costco because of overheating and fire risks.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, which issued the recall on Thursday for the 10-foot SunVilla Solar LED Market Umbrella, said consumers reported that lithium-ion batteries in the umbrella’s solar panel can overheat, posing fire and burn hazards.
The umbrella, which was sold in a variety of colors, has LED lights along its arms and a black solar panel battery puck at the top with a cover that says “YEEZE” or “YEEZE 1.” Customers should remove this puck and store it away from the sun or combustible material, the commission said. Consumers should not charge it with an AC adapter.
Customers flagged six cases in which the lithium-ion batteries overheated, the commission said. Three of these cases included instances in which the solar panels caught fire; two in which the umbrella caught fire; and a smoke inhalation injury.
The commission advised consumers to immediately stop using the umbrella and said owners could return it at any Costco or contact the company for a refund.
Costco and SunVilla, the maker of the umbrellas, are contacting known purchasers, the commission said. Neither company could be immediately reached for comment on Sunday.
The Canadian government also issued a recall of nearly 33,000 of the umbrellas. The product was sold from January 2021 through May 2022, according to the Canadian government’s consumer recall, while the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission said the product was available online and at Costco warehouses, selling for $130 to $160, from December 2020 through May 2022.
Lithium batteries have been connected to fires in other products, leading to increases in deaths and injuries, the New York Fire Department has said on Facebook. As of late last year, fires caused by lithium-ion batteries that the department responded to increased to 93, from 44 in 2020, and four deaths were attributed to lithium-ion battery fires, up from zero in 2020, the department said.
In April, four separate fires within 24 hours were caused by these batteries in electric scooters and bikes, causing 12 injuries, the department said.
“If using a lithium battery, follow the manufacturer’s instructions for charging and storage,” the department said. “Always use the manufacturer’s cord and power adapter made specifically for the device. If a battery overheats, discontinue use immediately.”
In Vancouver, Canada, lithium-ion battery fires became the top cause of fire deaths in 2022, with five deaths reported as of June 13, the authorities said.
The best water bottles to replace disposable bottles
The supply of gourds is plethoric, whether they are made of stainless steel, glass or plastic, equipped or not with a double insulated wall to preserve the cold and the heat. But don't worry: grip, comfort of use, waterproofing, insulation… we tested 25 models from Decathlon, Thermos, Takeya, Hydro Flask, HydraPak and others. Here are our picks.
The supply of gourds is plethoric, whether they are made of stainless steel, glass or plastic, equipped or not with a double insulated wall to preserve the cold and the heat. But don't worry: grip, comfort of use, waterproofing, insulation… we tested 25 models from Decathlon, Thermos, Takeya, Hydro Flask, HydraPak and others. Here are our picks.
Source: LeMonde | By Philippe Fontaine, translated by Google
Published on June 15, 2022 at 4:39 pm, updated on December 08, 2022 at 3:03 pm
Time toReading 30 mins.
PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LEMONDE
Adopted for ages by athletes and walkers, the water bottle invades workspaces, replacing disposable plastic bottles and cups. We reviewed dozens of models to ultimately retain 25 gourds, which we obtained, and to which we subjected a battery of extensive tests. We especially recommend the Decathlon Quechua MH500 (80 cl) for its insulating qualities and its very reasonable price, as well as the Tupperware Eco bottle +/Eco Sport + (75 cl) for its lightness and robustness. But we also enjoyed four other water bottles that offer an interesting alternative. We present them to you in detail, in order to allow you to choose according to your personal needs and tastes.
EX AEQUO WINNER
Tupperware Eco bottle +/ Eco Sport + (750 ml)
Our first choice in plastic, for more lightness
Offered in two versions that vary only by the type of cap, screw or valve, and available in four colors and five sizes, from 310 to 1,500 ml, Tupperware plastic water bottles have it all. Very light, extremely robust, they are made in Europe from recycled plastics.
*At the time of publication, the price was €14.90
Why change a formula that works? Marketed for many years, the Eco Bottle + has not changed either in its design or in its characteristics. So much the better because the product is particularly well thought out. Its shape makes it easy to hold and the cap, whether screw or valve, ensures a good seal, as our tests have confirmed. This is all the most remarkable as this bottle has no seal. We feared that over time, this tightness could deteriorate as we manipulate the screw thread or the quick opening. But one of the users we met during our investigation told us that he had been using his for four years without ever having had any problems with leaks. Tupperware also seems just as confident, since its bottles are guaranteed for 10 years.
EX AEQUO WINNER
Decathlon Quechua MH500 0.8L
Our first choice in stainless steel, for excellent insulation
The Quechua MH500 is a double-walled insulated flask equipped with a quick-opening sport-type cap, which easily unscrews to allow the addition of ice cubes, tea or fruit to infuse. It achieved the best result in the cold liquid insulation test and ranked third in the hot liquid insulation.
*At the time of publication, the price was 15€
When it comes to keeping liquids cold, the Quechua MH500 (80 cl) is the best of the 11 insulated water bottles tested. It is almost as effective for preserving hot drinks. On this point, only the SIGG Hot & Cold (550ml) and HoneyHolly (500ml) do slightly better. This performance can be explained in particular by its design: a double metal wall with an air gap, and the addition of a thin layer of copper inside its double wall, limiting the transfer of heat by radiation. The Quechua MH500 has a one-handed cap that can be locked to prevent any risk of it opening during transport. The stopper also includes a filter that retains tea or mint leaves, fruit or other foods to be infused.
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Original Gobi (400ml)
It's a little crush. Launched in 2010 by Gobi, the Original is a 100% French plastic water bottle. Very compact, extremely robust, it is pleasant to handle, very cute, and customizable via a label that slips into the center of its body.
*At the time of publication, the price was €23
In 2010, Florence Baitinger and Samuel Degrémont joined forces to launch the first plastic water bottle designed and manufactured entirely in France. The approach is first and foremost ecological, and aims to reduce the use of disposable plastic cups and bottles in the workplace, in favor of an eco-designed reusable bottle. But the Gobi Original is not only virtuous. Developed in partnership with two designers, it is a model of ergonomics. The loop located at the top allows it to be carried with the tip of your finger, while a quarter turn is enough to open or close the cap. Made of Tritan, a very solid and transparent copolyester, it has an extremely sober design.Only the removable elastomer base, which provides access to the slot for introducing the customizable label, is colored: 15 different colors are available.
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Recon Bottle HydraPak (1000ml)
Designed for both on-the-go use and office use, the Recon bottle seduces with its minimalist design and robust design, but above all with its amazing “smooth flow” system. Just turn the cap half a turn to let the liquid flow through a fine opening, with an ideal flow, whether drinking directly from the neck or filling a glass.
Buy on Amazon* Buy on Alltricks
*At time of publication, the price was €14.99
Well known to hikers and trail enthusiasts, thanks in particular to its flexible water pockets, HydraPak offers with the Recon a more versatile model, suitable for both walkers and sedentary workers. Available in three colors and with a unique capacity of 1000ml, the Recon takes its name from its composition. The container is indeed made of Tritan Renew, that is to say that 50% of the plastic used comes from recycled bottles. But if this virtuous initiative deserves to be clarified, it is not the reason why we have retained this gourd. It was its cap that first seduced us: a 180° rotation is enough to access the small slot from which the liquid flows with just the flow you need to drink quietly without spilling any. A half-turn in the opposite direction,
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Hydro Flask Wide Mouth (946ml)
The Hydro Flask Wide Mouth has, as its name suggests in English, a wide neck of 5.5 cm in diameter. Despite this, it can be brought to the mouth to drink (gently, anyway) without splashing. The Hydro Flask is more designed for viscous liquids such as soups or smoothies, or as an intermediate container, which will be used to fill a cup or mug.
Buy on Alltricks* Buy on Amazon
*At the time of publication, the sale price was €47.95
The wide opening of this bottle has many advantages. First, it is very practical to pour smoothies or thick soups without getting everywhere. Then, the large orifice significantly facilitates washing in the dishwasher. Finally, it does not prevent use in the mouth, provided you tilt the bottle slowly. And don't worry, this configuration does not affect the waterproofness or insulation of this double-walled metal vacuum insulated bottle, as our tests have shown. The bottle is available in three different formats (591 ml, 946 ml and 1182 ml) and fourteen different shades.
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Zest - Stainless steel bottle (500 ml)
A stainless steel water bottle, again? Yes, but this one is unique. It is indeed the only one that is entirely designed, manufactured and assembled in France. And always with the aim of minimizing the environmental footprint as much as possible. But not only, since it is produced by Zeste, a social and solidarity economy company (ESS), which strives to reconcile solidarity, economic viability and social utility.
*At the time of publication, the price was 36€
It's hard to get more minimalist than this single-walled brushed stainless steel water bottle (Made in Normandy), therefore not insulated. Its main originality lies in the six colors of the plastic cap (Made in Brittany). It's simple, it doesn't even have a name! It must be said that it is currently the only product of the young Zeste company. Designed by two French industrial designers, the 500 ml water bottle is primarily aimed at city dwellers who want a container that is compact enough to slip into a satchel or handbag, and light enough to be carried around all day long. day if needed.It will also appeal to users who are reluctant to use a plastic water bottle on a daily basis, and who prefer to turn to a material that they consider more secure from a health point of view.
Everything we recommend
EX AEQUO WINNER
Tupperware Eco bottle +/ Eco Sport + (750 ml)
Our first choice in plastic, for more lightness
*At the time of publication, the price was €14.90
EX AEQUO WINNER
Decathlon Quechua MH500 0.8L
Our first choice in stainless steel, for excellent insulation
*At the time of publication, the price was 15€
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Original Gobi (400ml)
*At the time of publication, the price was €23
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Recon Bottle HydraPak (1000ml)
Buy on Amazon* Buy on Alltricks
*At time of publication, the price was €14.99
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Hydro Flask Wide Mouth (946ml)
Buy on Alltricks* Buy on Amazon
*At the time of publication, the sale price was €47.95
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Zest - Stainless steel bottle (500 ml)
*At the time of publication, the price was 36€
The complete test
Plastic, stainless steel or glass bottle: a question of health?
Our 1st stainless steel choice: Decathlon Quechua MH500 0.8 l
We also like: the Zeste stainless steel bottle, more compact
Why trust us
The author of this guide was head of the equipment section at the Individual Computer for 11 years, in charge of comparisons in particular. Since 2012, he has worked for various media as a freelancer. Passionate about gastronomy, he passed his cooking CAP as a free candidate in 2019.
The six water bottles we recommend. PHILIPPE FONTAINE / THE WORLD
Before launching this guide, we interviewed various experts capable of providing answers to questions that it is legitimate to ask when choosing a product that will accompany us for years. Are plastic water bottles, especially Tritan, safe for health? Researchers from the European Union and ANSES (National Agency for Food Safety) have provided us with some answers. In addition, a doctor in physics introduced us to the mysteries of thermodynamics, to help us understand the role of double walls and air space in the insulation of isothermal gourds.
We also interviewed about fifteen users of reusable water bottles, by phone, e-mail, or face-to-face. Why did they buy a water bottle and what motivated the choice of model or material; are they satisfied with their purchase, do they have any regrets? Their varied responses were very instructive. We completed this survey by going through the many comments from users on online sales sites such as Amazon, but also on forums devoted to health and sport.
Who are these bottles for?
It's not a surprise, the majority of users we contacted have adopted the water bottle for convenience. Tired of lugging around your 1.5 liter bottle in transport, tired of getting up every 10 minutes to fill your cup, also tired of carrying water packs up to the fifth floor… without an elevator. Thus, Sylvie , who swapped her mug for a water bottle 2 years ago, indicates that she only fills her plastic water bottle when leaving home. Not only does the running water in his home taste good, but his 750ml water bottle is enough to keep him drinking all day at the office. In Lilica's family , everyone switched to an insulated water bottle three years ago.We put it in the fridge in the evening, to enjoy fresh water all day long, or we fill it with very hot tea to drink in the afternoon.
As for Étienne , it is to hydrate himself during his long sessions of cycling in an apartment that he bought himself a water bottle. He chose a model with a sports cap, in order to grab it and open it with one hand and drink from a straw without getting it all over the place. For Haja , on the other hand, it was environmental protection that motivated the purchase of his one-litre glass water bottle six years ago. If he admits that it is quite heavy, it has never bothered him. He finds glass greener, but also much more hygienic than any other material. Helineon the contrary swears only by plastic. The glass is too heavy and fragile, and she fears the contact of metal with her teeth. A follower of the water bottle for three years, she admits to changing it every seven or eight months, because even if she only puts water in it, the plastic gives it a "taste" that bothers her. Heline is not the only one to make this criticism. But is there cause for concern?
Plastic, stainless steel or glass bottle: a question of health?
By bringing these gourds to our lips several times a day, are we taking a risk? The question amounts to wondering about the harmlessness of the materials of which these gourds are made. We interviewed several experts on this subject: the risks seem zero for glass or stainless steel water bottles, which are chemically neutral. On the other hand, uncertainty hovers over plastic water bottles.
The plastic water bottles we tested ignore bisphenol A, a material banned since 2015 in the composition of food containers, such as baby bottles, bottles, cans, etc. Used for 50 years in the formulation of certain plastics, its health effects have been proven in animals and are suspected in humans, particularly on reproduction, metabolism and cardiovascular pathologies.
What about the plastics that replace it? Currently, there are no studies pointing to their adverse health effects, but research has shown that they tend to leak tiny chemical compounds into the liquids they contain. Since 2011, ANSES has endeavored to identify the dangers of potential substitutes for BPA. In particular, the polypropylene (PP), used in the Tupperware water bottles in our selection, and the Tritan copolyester (a registered trademark) used in all the other plastic water bottles in this guide were evaluated. This last material, developed by the American company Eastman Chemical, is produced from three monomers which, like those used in PP, are among the substances authorized by the European Union for the manufacture of food containers.
This means, among other things, that this plastic, but also all the technological additives added to it - antioxidants, dyes - do not exceed the authorized migration limit, which designates the maximum quantity of microscopic plastic residues that can migrate from the container to the liquid with which it comes into contact. As Bruno Teste, scientific and technical project manager at ANSES, told us, the monomers, which are linked to each other in a sort of three-dimensional scaffolding to form this polymer, are naturally very little subject to migration. . It is especially the technological additives, for example the antioxidants found in all plastic containers, which are likely to migrate, because they are not chemically attached to the structure of the plastic.This is why their composition and behavior are closely monitored. As the industrial manufacturing process for Tritan is confidential, to our knowledge there is no precise data on the composition of the material. But to obtain its authorization on the European market, Eastman Chemical had to demonstrate that all the compounds used in its formulation are authorized by the EU.
However, it should be noted that there is still a lack of knowledge and tools to assess the "cocktail effect" , ie the consequences of repeated exposure to technological additives. Because to the water in the reusable plastic bottle, you have to add the meat sold in a cellophane tray, the bottle of milk, the bag of crisps or the packet of sweets, all of which are likely to release substances, and therefore to expose the user at a large daily dose.
To continue this analysis, we must mention a study published last May 5 in the Journal of Hazardous Materials. Researchers from the University of Copenhagen studied the migration of plastic compounds from reusable water bottles by analyzing, after 24 hours, the composition of the tap water with which they had been filled just after washing in the dishwasher. They detected more than 400 of them. If, as we have seen, this migration is known and documented, the scientists have identified substances which a priori have no reason to be there, such as DEET in particular, used in the formulation of insecticides. They nevertheless specify that this substance could have been formed from the decomposition of laurolactam (an authorized compound), under the action of the dishwashing detergent.
The researchers thus indicate that “ the washing process in the dishwasher promotes the migration of plasticizers, antioxidants and photoinitiators into drinking water . The highest toxic risk was measured for plastic water bottles that had been filled directly after removing from the dishwasher, without additional rinsing . If they finally add that additional studies are necessary to measure the toxicity of these substances, they recommend washing the plastic water bottles by hand, and then rinsing them thoroughly with running water before filling them.
To conclude this delicate subject, let us recall that the plastic water bottles sold in the EU do not present, in the current state of knowledge, health risk. However, one uncertainty remains, and if it alarms you, we advise you to opt for a stainless steel or glass bottle. However, be sure to handle them with care. While a glass water bottle is very likely to break when dropped on a hard floor from the desk surface or the cup holder of your trainer, a full metal water bottle is likely to be more or less damaged. In the best case, it will get away with a nice bump, but in the worst-case scenario, its waterproofness or insulation could be compromised. Finally, be aware that a plastic gourd has the advantage of lightness, and all the more so as its capacity is high: the Tupperware Eco Bottle + of 1,000 ml thus weighs only 108 grams, against 250 grams for the stainless steel gourd not isothermal Quechua MH100,
The 25 water bottles we tested. PHILIPPE FONTAINE / THE WORLD
How we chose them
In order to select the models tested in this guide, we pre-selected several dozen water bottles, then scoured user reviews for each product studied, while keeping in mind that user reviews are not necessarily honest and can be made by people who received the product for free, or even posted by the resellers themselves. We have ruled out poorly rated products, to retain only the best-selling water bottles, in France of course, but also in Europe and the United States.
We did not retain the aluminum water bottles either. Even if they are now very rare, they are mainly intended for nomadic use, and tend to deform in the event of an impact. In addition, they are hardly less heavy than single-walled stainless steel water bottles. Finally, we have also overlooked overly decorated stainless steel water bottles, produced by retailers who change their design every year to keep up with fashion and encourage buyers to repeat their purchase. Their manufacture has a greater impact on the environment than that of simpler water bottles.
Our witnesses gave us the reference of their reusable water bottle. A third of them told us that they had bought a product without a specific brand, most often in a supermarket or a sports and leisure store. The others bought their water bottle on the Internet, choosing one of the best-rated models.
Finally, we have selected three Made in France water bottles, including two models manufactured by companies that attach particular importance to the environmental impact of their products. In this regard, be aware that there is no longer any production line for insulated water bottles in Europe. These models therefore come mainly from China. On the other hand, single-walled stainless steel water bottles can be manufactured in the EU. Thus, the Zeste model is 100% Made in France , and Decathlon plans to relocate the manufacture of the Quechua MH100 to Europe, starting next year.
As you will see while browsing this guide, most manufacturers offer the same model in different capacities, from 250 ml to 1,500 ml. For use in the office, at home or for short outings, a capacity of 500 to 750 ml seems well suited to us. Their weight, once full, remains reasonable, including for insulated water bottles, and handling is easy. For one-day hikes, a larger volume can be useful, if you cannot fill the bottle between two stages. Finally, the 250 or 310 ml water bottles, which are very compact and light, are suitable for a walk in town.
How we tested them
We tested 25 water bottles for this buying guide, some of which were of the same model but of different capacity. We first checked their tightness.
Sealing test
This is in our opinion the most important criterion for a water bottle that will be transported, sometimes unceremoniously, in a sports bag, a handbag or the like. For this, we completely filled each bottle with water tinted with food coloring, then we stored them upside down on absorbent paper for 24 hours. We've evaluated all of the caps that come with each bottle, whether they're screw caps or sports caps. Good news, no leaks were detected during this test.
Temperature test
We measured the insulation of insulated water bottles by filling them with water between 12 and 14°, then with hot water at around 70°. We then checked the temperature every hour for 8 hours. In order to judge their effectiveness, we compared these models with the SIGG Shield non-insulated stainless steel bottle. With the exception of the Neolid Canopée, which combines metal and plastic, all of these water bottles are built on the same model: two metal walls form the container, the inner wall, which contains the liquid and separate from the outer wall, is welded to the latter by the bottom of the bottle and the neck (or by its neck only).
Maintaining the cold after 8 hours
(the starting temperature is 13°)
Température
Decathlon MH500SIGG Hot&Cold LightHoney Holly BottleHydro Flask Wide MouthSuper SparrowHydro Flask Standard MouthDecathlon MH100Super Sparrow sports capTakeya Insulated Bottle MidnightTakeya Straw Insulated BottleNeolid Canopy
14°18°
In some models, an air gap is created between the two walls to improve insulation. Finally, a copper coating can be applied to one of the internal walls to further limit heat transfer by radiation. Is this refinement effective? The best insulated water bottle in our selection, the Quechua MH500, has this copper coating, but its ability to preserve high temperatures was found to be slightly worse than that of the Sigg Hot & Cold Light, which does not.
Keeping warm after 8 hours
(the starting temperature is 70°)
Température
Neolid CanopyTakeya Straw Insulated BottleTakeya Insulated Bottle MidnightSuper Sparrow sports capSuper SparrowDecathlon MH500Hydro Flask Wide MouthHydro Flask Standard MouthDecathlon MH500Honey Holly BottleSIGG Hot&Cold Light
30°50°
Test use
Handling, opening and closing, as well as contact with the mouth, are essential criteria when choosing a water bottle. Some models are very wide, to the point of being difficult to grasp for a small hand - especially as their capacity is large. A full one-liter stainless steel flask is more than 1,300 grams to lift.
What about lip contact? Again, it all depends on the user. Some mouth all the gourds with the same enthusiasm while others find the rim too thin, or the contact with the unpleasant lips. No water bottle tested deserves a red card, but we indicate in the product sheets the models which could prove to be embarrassing for the most sensitive.
The handling by several users made it possible to detect a concern that we had not thought of: noise. Some plugs emit a noticeable squeak or squeak when screwing or unscrewing them. Here too, we indicate the models concerned.
Our 1st choice in plastic: Tupperware Eco bottle +
PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LEMONDE
EX AEQUO WINNER
Tupperware Eco bottle +/ Eco Sport + (750 ml)
Our first choice in plastic, for more lightness
Offered in two versions that vary only in the type of cap, screw or valve, and available in four colors and five sizes, from 310 to 1,500 ml, Tupperware plastic water bottles have it all. Very light, extremely robust, they are made in Europe from recycled plastics.
*At the time of publication, the price was €14.90
The Eco Bottle + and Eco Sport + are the best choice for those who want to enjoy the benefits of a reusable plastic bottle. For starters, they are very light. The 310ml bottle weighs just 48 grams, the 500ml, 63 grams, while the massive 1.5-litre Eco Sport+ comes in at just 133 grams. In comparison, the 400 ml Gobi Original, which we also recommend, weighs 142 grams on the scale, and the 1 liter HydraPak borders on 200 grams! Tiny weights, therefore, which will appeal to hikers and walkers as well as sportsmen and office workers. As for the tiny 310 ml bottle and its 18 cm high and 6 in diameter, it slips easily into a pocket or a small handbag.
The thin protrusion of the screw cap allows quick opening with the tip of the index finger PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LE MONDE
Then it doesn't look like much, but the screw cap is surprisingly well thought out. The thin plastic rod that is there allows the opening and closing of a single finger. It also facilitates the opening if one has a little too much force during the closing. The cap of the Eco sport + water bottle is even more practical, since the opening is done with a flick. You then access a small circular neck, well sized, which allows you to drink quickly without risk of splashing. Of course, the cap can be completely unscrewed to facilitate cleaning, or to slip ice cubes into the bottle.
The sports cap opens with a flick and closes just as easily, for a perfect seal. PHILIPPE FONTAINE / THE WORLD
The five bottles we tested, with classic or sport openings, passed the 24-hour leak test. We must admit that we were a little worried about this point because the gourds have no seal. Consequently, it is only the precision of the thread that guarantees tightness. And as confirmed by a witness who owns this model of water bottle, this tightness persists even after years of daily use.
The bottle is only made of PP5 plastic (polypropylene), an extremely strong material, and commonly used in the manufacture of food containers. The particularity here lies in the origin of the plastics, which come from recycling channels, before being treated and then transformed in Europe.
Non-critical defects
It's hard to find fault with these two plastic water bottles, but we can formulate a small regret. The Ecosport+ bottle is not available in 310ml. However, because of its size and tiny weight, this format would be ideal for the jogger who wishes to hydrate during short training sessions.
Colors: yellow, orange, red, blue
Capacity: 310ml, 500ml, 750ml, 1l, 1.5l
Lids: screw cap, sport clamshell cap
Can be put in the dishwasher: yes
Our 1st choice in stainless steel: the Decathlon Quechua MH500 0.8 l
PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LEMONDE
EX AEQUO WINNER
Decathlon Quechua MH500 0.8L
Our first choice in stainless steel, for excellent insulation
The Quechua MH500 is a double-walled insulated flask equipped with a quick-opening sport-type cap, which easily unscrews to allow the addition of ice cubes, tea or fruit to infuse. It achieved the best result in the cold liquid insulation test and ranked third in the hot liquid insulation.
*At the time of publication, the price was 15€
The Quechua MH500 is without doubt the best insulated water bottle in our selection. Not only is its performance in terms of insulation excellent, but it is offered at an attractive price. This in no way prevents it from displaying a modern design: a double wall with an air gap , an internal facade lined with a thin layer of copper aimed at limiting heat exchange by radiation. These characteristics ensure excellent conservation of hot or cold water for long periods.
During the tests, the liquid with which we filled the bottle went from 13.8° to 15.1° in eight hours, a gain of only 1.3°. A record, especially since with the exception of the Sigg Hot & Cold Light, all the other models gained at least 2° during this period. As for the water in our stainless steel control flask, after 6 hours it showed the same temperature as the test room, ie 21.5°.
The results of the Decathlon water bottle are also remarkable for the preservation of hot liquids, since the water poured at 70.3° still reached 51.1° at the end of the test, a loss of only 18.2° in 8 hours. By way of comparison, the water contained in our non-insulated stainless steel control bottle cooled down to room temperature in just six hours. Enough to enjoy a hot soup or coffee for most of the day. Especially since the bottle tolerates liquids heated up to a temperature of 95°!
The Quechua MH500 has a quick opening cap. We found no leaks during the 24 hour leak test. The interest of such a mechanism is obvious on a bicycle, but also in a car, since it is no longer necessary to let go of the steering wheel, the gripping and opening of the bottle being carried out with the same hand. Note that by sliding the opening button down, you lock the bottle, which prevents it from opening during transport, in a sports bag for example. Note that we did not activate the lock during the leak test. Not the slightest drop has escaped, which confirms that this device does not affect the seal. Although quite simple in its design, the stopper has a filter, a plastic grid to be precise, which retains the tea leaves or herbal teas,
When you push the button down, you reveal a red dot that confirms the lock. PHILIPPE FONTAINE / THE WORLD
This water bottle is made in Asia, like all insulated water bottles, using a process that consumes large quantities of resources - water in particular. The Quechua MH500 was nevertheless designed with the aim of limiting the environmental impact: according to Decathlon, it is produced in a factory supplied with 100% renewable energy. In addition, the paint used for the base of the gourd does not contain solvents. In this regard, note that its grainy appearance was chosen to limit condensation and ensure good support. If the grip is indeed safe thanks to this coating, we are less convinced by the "condensation" argument, since the upper half of the gourd is in raw stainless steel and therefore potentially subject to this phenomenon.The MH500 that we tested offers a capacity of 80 cl for an empty weight of 345 grams. Yes, an insulated bottle weighs more than a single-walled stainless steel bottle (200 grams for the Sigg Shield), and even more than a plastic bottle (92 grams for the 750 ml Tupperware Eco Bottle +). It's the price to pay for enjoying a cold drink all day long, whether you're at the office or on a hike. Especially since the neck is wide enough to slip ice cubes into it. From an aesthetic point of view, the MH500 displays great sobriety. Available in five plain colours, which only cover the lower half of the bottle, it affirms its identity: this is a reusable water bottle, not a fashion accessory. And that's good because even if it is robust (5-year warranty) and durable,
Non-critical defects
The MH500 is from our point of view the best insulated bottle of our selection. However, it is not perfect, even if the defects that we have noted are not dramatic. The main one concerns the locking system, which is impossible to operate with one hand. Even holding the bottle on the other, the action remains painful. Admittedly, we tested a new water bottle, and it is possible that the device softens over time, but that annoyed us a little.
The other concern concerns the bottleneck. If you use the quick opening, no problem, the contact with the plastic is soft, and the shape is well thought out to avoid being splashed while drinking. But if you drink directly from the neck, which is possible if you swap the sports cap for an optional screw cap, the contact of the metal with the lips is not pleasant, because of the edges that are too thin.
Colours: Dark Petrol, Coral Red, Caribbean Blue, Twine Grey, Plum
Capacity: 500ml, 800ml, 1000ml
Lids: sports cap, screw cap
Can be put in the dishwasher: yes
We also like: the Gobi Original, cute and French
PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LEMONDE
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Original Gobi (400ml)
It's a little crush. Launched in 2010 by Gobi, the Original is a 100% French plastic water bottle. Very compact, extremely robust, it is pleasant to handle, very cute, and customizable via a label that slips into the center of its body.
*At the time of publication, the price was €23
It is in the factory of Périgny-sur-Yerre, in the 94, that the Gobi Original are manufactured, before being assembled and dispatched by the disabled employees of the ESAT of Rosebrie. 100% Made in France, therefore, which reflects the committed, even militant approach of the company's founders. Launched in 2010, the water bottle was designed to replace disposable plastic bottles in companies. This is why it incorporates this slot for the label, from the bottom to the center of the container.
To print a personalized label in the right format, just use the small utility available on the Gobi website. PHILIPPE FONTAINE / THE WORLD
This space is designed to leave a label that will identify its owner: just detach the flexible and colored base to slide it in. Convenient when several colleagues use the same model in open space or when taking it to a meeting. Speaking of which, if the Gobi is equipped with this little rigid buckle, it is precisely to hold it with one finger when you move around with your laptop or diary in your arms.
The handle of the Gobi Original was thought, from its conception, to be seized with a finger, if your hands are full. PHILIPPE FONTAINE / THE WORLD
Just as well thought out, the cap can be screwed and unscrewed a quarter of a turn... and above all in silence! For the manufacture of its plastic water bottles, Gobi has opted for Tritan copolyester which combines transparency with great strength and high thermal resistance. The bottle thus supports hot liquids up to 60°. Finally, the slightly flared base and the removable non-slip shell ensure excellent stability.
However, the rigidity and solidity of this bottle translates into a fairly high weight of 142 grams for the 400 ml model. Nothing dramatic of course, but in comparison, the Nalgene, also in Tritan, weighs 40 grams more for a capacity of 1000 ml.
Base colors: Lagoon blue, Sapphire, Emerald, Olive, Water green, Lemon, Koï, Pure orange, Millennial pink, Dew, Violet, Black, Storm, Cloud
Capacity: 400ml
Lid: screw cap with handle
Can be put in the dishwasher: yes
We also like: the HydraPak Recon, with a practical cap
PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LEMONDE
WE ALSO RECOMMEND
Recon Bottle HydraPak (1000ml)
Designed for both on-the-go use and office use, the Recon bottle seduces with its minimalist design and robust design, but above all with its amazing “smooth flow” system. Just turn the cap half a turn to let the liquid flow through a fine opening, with an ideal flow, whether drinking directly from the neck or filling a glass.
Buy on Amazon* Buy on Alltricks
*At time of publication, the price was €14.99
Oh that cap! Should we recommend a water bottle only on this point? We are convinced of this, because on closer inspection, this is one of the main aspects that differentiate the water bottles we tested. The "smooth flow" system of the HydraPak Recon is unparalleled practicality for those wishing to drink quickly without risking a minor accident. A half turn in one direction, and you reach the opening through which the liquid flows with an optimal flow. So much so that you don't have to glue your lips to the bottle.
Even when drinking " à la regalade " , without the bottle touching the lips, you don't lose a drop! Once quenched, half a turn in the opposite direction, and the bottle is locked and sealed thanks to the seal located in the cap. A good point: it comes off with a simple zipper to be cleaned.
The trickle of water that escapes once the cap is unscrewed makes it easy to drink, even without sticking your lips to the plastic PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LE MONDE
In short, this cap is amazing, and that's good because the bottle is clearly not designed to be used without it. Its complete unscrewing is quite painful due to a fairly long thread, and one is embarrassed by the plastic tab, which is also so useful for carrying the water bottle with one finger. Fortunately, as it offers a capacity of 1000 ml, you hardly need to open it more than twice a day.
Like all transparent water bottles, the Recon is made of Tritan, but in order to limit the environmental impact of manufacturing, HydraPak has opted for Tritan Renew, which contains 50% plastic from disposable bottles. Similarly, screen printing is reduced to a bare minimum. However, we appreciate the milliliter scale, which makes it easy to dose liquids to be mixed, such as syrups for example. Finally, note that this is one of the few plastic water bottles that can be placed in the freezer. It also supports hot liquids up to 60°.
On the downside, the cap of the bottle we tested tended to emit a rather stressful sound, whether it was fully opened or turned half a turn. To avoid this inconvenience, it is essential to handle it slowly. Think about it, if you don't want to trigger the ire of your colleagues!
Colors: blue, black, green
Capacity: 1000ml
Lid: screw cap with handle
Can be put in the dishwasher: yes
We also like: the Hydro Flask Wide Mouth and its wide opening
PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LEMONDE
WE ALSO RECOMMEND [a]
Hydro Flask Wide Mouth (946ml)
The Hydro Flask Wide Mouth has, as its name suggests in English, a wide neck of 5.5 cm in diameter. Despite this, it can be brought to the mouth to drink (gently, anyway) without splashing. The Hydro Flask is more designed for viscous liquids such as soups or smoothies, or as an intermediate container, which will be used to fill a cup or mug.
Buy on Alltricks* Buy on Amazon
*At the time of publication, the sale price was €47.95
With its large opening of 5.5 cm in diameter, the Hydro Flask Wide Mouth is not intended, at least in its basic version, for the user in a hurry who grabs his flask all day long to drink one or two sips. When you drink too quickly, you risk splashing, especially when it is full. To appreciate it, you have to take your time, and lean it slowly towards your mouth. If this is not your habit but the Hydro Flask brand interests you, then it is better to opt for the standard opening model. On the other hand, if you are looking for a container to keep your favorite drinks hot or cold that you will pour into a bowl or a glass to taste them, then you will undoubtedly appreciate the Hydro Flask Wide Mouth.
The handle is very practical for transporting the bottle, which still weighs almost 1400 grams once filled PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LE MONDE
Whether it's soups, smoothies, coffee or soft drinks, they will be kept in excellent insulation conditions, thanks to the double-walled stainless steel, under vacuum. Thus, the cold liquid that we poured into it, initially measured at 13.3°, only gained 2.2° in 8 hours As for the hot liquid, it went from 70.8° to 47.9° during this period, a drop of 22.9°. Not so bad, knowing that the liquid in the non-isothermal stainless steel control gourd had reached the ambient temperature of 21.5° after only six hours. Finally, it should be noted that Hydro Flask will offer from next August an optional sport type cap, compatible with the Wide Mouth opening. Enough to satisfy compulsive and hurried drinkers, even if other models seem to us to be better suited to this use.
The sports cap for the wide-mouth bottle will be available as an option in August 2022 PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LE MONDE
We tested the Hydro Flask Wide Mouth in its intermediate 946ml size. But several people we showed it to found it too wide. It is true that with its 9 cm in diameter, it is hardly suitable for small hands, nor for car cup holders, especially since it weighs 1,400 grams ounce filled! To the point that the grip can be tricky, despite the grainy coating supposed to ensure a good hold. With its 7.4 cm in diameter, the 591 ml model therefore seems to us better suited to small morphologies. As for the 1,182 ml bottle (1,700 g filled!), we will reserve it for bodybuilding sessions, for those who wish to use it as a dumbbell, then hydrate themselves for a long time!
Capacity: 591ml, 946ml and 1182ml
Lids: screw cap with handle, integrated straw cap (from August 2022)
We also like: the stainless steel Zeste bottle, more compact
PHILIPPE FONTAINE / LEMONDE
WE ALSO RECOMMEND [b]
Zest - Stainless steel bottle (500 ml)
A stainless steel water bottle, again? Yes, but this one is unique. It is indeed the only one that is entirely designed, manufactured and assembled in France. And always with the aim of minimizing the environmental footprint as much as possible. But not only, since it is produced by Zeste, a social and solidarity economy company (ESS), which strives to reconcile solidarity, economic viability and social utility.
*At the time of publication, the price was 36€
From this point of view, the contract is fulfilled. The grip is easy and the opening is wide enough. On the other hand, we would have liked the edges to be thicker. Not that they shear the lips, but when a very cold liquid is brought to the mouth, the sensation is not pleasant. Note that the gourd transmits the heat or cold of the liquid that is put in it extremely well. To overcome this inconvenience specific to all single-walled stainless steel water bottles, Zeste has developed a neoprene cover (Made in La Ferrière, in Vendée), but its insulation has not been deemed effective enough to keep liquids at temperature. or avoid condensation. A new cover is being finished and should be offered as an option very soon.
The main flaw of this gourd is its price, of course. The insulated stainless steel Quechua MH500 costs twice as much. The price is explained by the shortage of production tools on our territory, and the cost of labour, which is significantly higher in France than in Asia. Redemptive then? Obviously not. Because if the purchase price is high, you have to take into account the fact that such a water bottle is virtually indestructible and will accompany you for decades. So much so that it is guaranteed for life by the manufacturer!
Capacity: 500ml
Lids: screw cap
Can be put in the dishwasher: yes
The other models tested
The water bottle we tested, available on Amazon, is called HoneyHolly. But it is also found under the brands Ours Ecolo, Made Sustained, Wrendale, Mira, etc., as well as under many private labels. All are made in the same Chinese factory, with dealers adding their logo and choosing the exterior design. Some even renew it every year. We are in the middle of fast fashion when, given the environmental cost of their manufacture, these water bottles are intended to be kept for years, and used daily. The HoneyHolly models have the advantage of sobriety, since they are available in 12 uniform colors. They are also supplied with a removable neoprene cover.But that turns out to be of little use because the insulation performance is among the best of the selected water bottles. Small flat, the base of the bottle is a little swollen, which makes it unstable if it is jostled inadvertently.
Capacity: 350ml, 500ml, 650ml, 750ml
Material: Stainless steel
Isotherm: yes
Quechua MH100 hiking water bottle
Available in 600 ml, 1,000 ml and 1,500 ml, these non-insulated stainless steel water bottles are distinguished by their limited weight and their downright derisory price. Ideal for hiking or telecommuting, their use in open space may, however, cause hysteria among your colleagues. In question, the unbearable noise of the screw cap, regardless of the gentleness with which it is handled!
Capacity: 600ml, 1000ml, 1500ml
Material: Stainless steel
Isotherm: no
Quechua MH100 Insulated Hiking Flask
This 750ml capacity double-wall vacuum insulated wide mouth flask performed well in insulation tests, albeit lower than the Hydro Flask Wide Mouth 946ml. If price is an essential factor, then the insulated MH100 is the best alternative to this model. The bottle has a fully removable cap for easy cleaning.
Capacity: 750ml
Material: Stainless steel
Isotherm: yes
If the Gobi Original seduced us, the same cannot be said of the Mini model. Yes, it is made in France but still, paying 20 euros for a semi-rigid plastic bottle with a volume of 25 cl seems very exaggerated to us. For comparison, the 310 ml Tupperware, made in Europe, costs less than 10 euros!
Capacity: 250ml
Material: plastic
Isotherm: no
To be honest, we almost recommended the Gobi Indoor. It was its price, too high in our opinion, that deterred us. But if you are looking for a glass water bottle, this is a reasonable choice. Compact, rather pretty with its protective shell in Dryflex Green, a plastic partially made from biological or agricultural co-products, easy to transport, it is also customizable. The transparent disc located on the cap is removable and protects a label. And of course, the Indoor is 100% Made in France.
Capacity: 500ml
Material: glass
Isotherm: no
Identical to the Hydro Flask Large Mouth, this model can accommodate a screw cap or a sports cap. Three models are available 532, 621 or 710 ml and in a wide range of uniform shades. Isothermal, it offers good preservation of hot and cold liquids, without however reaching the excellence of the Quechua MH500.
Capacity: 532ml, 631ml, 710ml
Material: Stainless steel
Isotherm: yes
The wide-mouth Nalgene, made in the USA, is primarily intended for hikers who wish to have a large capacity bottle that is both light (182 grams) and very resistant. It is of course suitable for more sedentary use, but with its 9 cm in diameter, this water bottle is not the most suitable for small hands. Marketed for many years, it is now made of Tritan Renew, the copolyester made of 50% recycled plastic. In addition, the serigraphy, which includes the graduation in milliliters, is printed on a removable and recyclable plastic sheet, if one wishes to further add to the minimalism of the bottle.
Capacity: 1000ml
Material: plastic
Isotherm: no
The Neolid company is proud to indicate that its Canopée insulated bottle is made in France. But in this case, only the upper part, made of Tritan plastic, as well as the assembly is carried out in our country. The stainless steel isothermal cylinder which constitutes the bulk of the bottle is "Made in China". Despite everything, we should welcome this initiative which aims to repatriate part of the production to our territory. Unfortunately, the Canopy presents disappointing performances in terms of insulation. In question, the plastic neck, which removes a large part of the benefit provided by the double-walled insulated drum. Thus, the liquid that we poured into it lost 36.1° in 8 hours, while at the same time, the SIGG Hot & Cold Light only lost 16.4!
Capacity: 750ml
Material: Stainless steel and plastic
Isotherm: yes
Available in four different formats and 20 colours, the Super Sparrow is the only water bottle in our selection to be sold with two caps, one with a screw, the other with an integrated straw, but also the only one to provide a neoprene cover for further increase the insulation, as well as two plastic straws and a brush to clean them! The screw cap, also in stainless steel, has a handle and is covered with a pretty bamboo disc. Only downside, the opening is noisy to the point of scaring away some users. We tested the insulation without the cover, and noted good results for the preservation of hot and cold liquids, which however do not reach the level of the best water bottles in our guide.
Capacity: 350ml, 500ml, 750ml, 1000ml
Material: Stainless steel
Isotherm: yes
Takeya Actives insulated - spout lid
Interesting, the double cap of this insulated bottle. The main one allows access to the inside of the container and it is wide enough to put large ice cubes or food. The top one, also with screws, gives access to a narrow opening, as practical for drinking as for filling an external container. Although equipped with a double stainless steel wall with air gap, the insulation of this gourd is quite average, well below the tenors of our selection. Thus, the 70.1° liquid that we poured into it lost 27.8° in eight hours. It's a lot.
Capacity: 510ml, 623ml, 680ml, 907ml, 1133ml
Material: Stainless steel
Isotherm: yes
Takeya Actives insulated - straw lid
This bottle differs from the previous one only by its cap, which incorporates a retractable pipette connected to a straw. If the seal remains perfect, the insulation is no better than that of the pouring cap model above. The 70° liquid saw its temperature drop by 28.9° in eight hours, and the 12.5° liquid gained 3.9° in the same time. Disappointing results, especially since the price of the bottle is quite high. Another regret, this model incorporates a long removable plastic straw, which should be cleaned regularly. However, the swab is not provided, unlike the Super Sparrow gourds.
Capacity: 510ml, 623ml, 680ml, 907ml
Material: Stainless steel
Isotherm: yes
Phillip Fontaine
[thank you for reading. if you spot the a/b test please let me know what you prefer. abtest@xawat.com]
How Climate Change Can Supercharge Snowstorms
Less snow is falling in a warming world, but higher temperatures also allow the air to hold more water, creating additional precipitation.
Source: New York Times | By Anne Barnard
Dec. 22, 2022
If the globe is warming, shouldn’t there be less snow?
It’s a common question. So last winter, as another intense snowstorm blanketed a large part of the United States, we put it to Kevin Reed, an associate professor at the School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences at Stony Brook University on Long Island.
It is true, he said, that in a warming world, less snow is falling overall, and covering less area. But higher temperatures also allow the atmosphere to hold more water, which creates more precipitation and makes it more likely to fall quickly.
“That means there are still times and cases where that precipitation increase comes in the form of snow,” Dr. Reed said. “We know that to be true.”
Summers have always been more humid than winters because warmer air absorbs more moisture. As the moisture condenses, warm air rises faster, bringing even more moisture in a feedback loop that can create sudden, fast-falling downpours like the ones that spurred deadly floods in New York and New Jersey in the aftermath of Hurricane Ida last year.
Overall, Dr. Reed said, a few degrees of global warming means that some storms that would have brought snow on a 31-degree day will end up as rain at 33 degrees. But on the other hand, more snow falls when temperatures are just below freezing than during extreme cold.
“So a storm that’s a little warmer but still below freezing, a storm that might’ve been a 25-degree storm but ends up as a 30-degree storm, means it will snow more,” he said.
Flash floods are generally more likely during warm-weather downpours. But freezing temperatures bring their own flooding risks, Dr. Reed said: Ice can block drainage systems, and if rain or warmer temperatures follow snow, the melting can cause flooding.
“That’s the worst-case scenario when we’re right around the freezing line: Rain and snow melt and blockages all at once,” he said.
Anne Barnard covers climate and environment for the Metro desk. She was Beirut bureau chief from 2012 to 2018. She joined The Times in 2007 after covering the Middle East and the Iraq war for The Boston Globe. @ABarnardNYT
'New collaboration models' needed to hit US offshore wind goals: commerce secretary
'New collaboration models' needed to hit US offshore wind goals: commerce secretary
Gina Raimondo – who previously helped spur Block Island array – tells industry event that pioneering project holds key lessons over cooperation on permitting reform and stakeholder engagement
Source: Recharge News | By Tim Ferry
US secretary of commerce Gina Raimondo told an offshore wind awards event that new models of collaboration between industry and government are needed for the nation to meet the Biden administration’s goal of 30GW in place by the end of the decade.
“Every one of these projects is complicated and requires that collaboration, innovation and new models, and to take what has happened in Europe to the US,” Raimondo told the Ventus Awards gala in Washington, DC.
As head of the Department of Commerce, Raimondo oversees the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which plays a major role in the environmental impact statement (EIS) required for each project.
The former governor of Rhode Island, however, has been a driving force in the US offshore wind industry for far longer, starting with her spearheading of the Block Island Wind project nearly a decade ago.
The 30MW Block Island array was the first offshore wind project developed in US waters and blazed the trail for the American industry.
“Everything we did [at Block Island] was a first,” she said. “It didn’t happen overnight. It took years to coordinate with the developer.”
Block Island Wind faced multiple regulatory setbacks on its decade-long journey and getting it across the finish line took concerted effort by government and the private sector.
“These projects showcase the power of American labour, American innovation, American ingenuity, and the great things that can happen at the intersection of public and private sector,” she said.
“It is something that we now need to replicate,” she said, adding: “I hope the work we did [on Block Island] will allow us to scale much more quickly.”
Permitting was a major hurdle for Block Island and remains a bottleneck today. The Biden administration is prioritising a streamlined process through a “whole-of-government” approach to inter-agency cooperation.
“We need to get the permitting right in a speedy time frame,” Raimondo admitted. “We have already started to take action to streamline and improve permitting without cutting corners.”
Ensuring that the process remains rigorous is a major concern, and allegations of corner-cutting in the EIS are at the core of multiple lawsuits aimed at the US’ first two offshore wind arrays.
“NOAA has a huge role to play, and we will play that role in partnership with [developers], from providing foundational information about our oceans and climate to undertaking regulatory review and permitting to get these new projects ready for construction,” she said.
'More turbines in ocean and sky'
Referencing roundtable discussions between federal agencies and the industry on permitting reform, Raimondo told the gala, “We have already started to take action and make changes based upon [industry’s] advice.
“We have to get more of these turbines in the ocean and in the sky,” she told the awards gala. “And we're going to do what we need to do to get the permitting right.”
Along with government and industry collaboration, she highlighted the need to widen the scope of participants in project development.
“You cannot short circuit stakeholder engagement. If you put in the hard work in the front end of the process, talking to the stakeholders, talking to the commercial fishermen, talking to the recreational fishermen, doing the permitting properly, it actually will get done faster.”
Job creation is a major part of offshore wind’s appeal, she noted. The Department of Energy estimates that offshore wind will generate $12bn in annual investment and add 77,000 jobs.
“The promise of offshore wind to bring clean energy, high wage, highly skilled jobs to coastal communities is amazing,” Raimondo said.
Raimondo spoke as she was honoured with the Heronemus Award for Outstanding Achievement for her contributions in advancing the sector.
The Heronemus Award, named in honor of William Edward Heronemus (1920 – 2002), known as the “father of modern wind power”, is the highest award given at the Ventus Gala and recognises an individual who has contributed significantly to the expansion of offshore wind energy.
Battle Over Deep-Sea Mining Takes on New Urgency as Trial Run Winds Down
A Canadian company is testing mining equipment in the Pacific Ocean in its quest for metals needed for electric vehicles. Environmentalists oppose the mining, which could begin in 2024.
A Canadian company is testing mining equipment in the Pacific Ocean in its quest for metals needed for electric vehicles. Environmentalists oppose the mining, which could begin in 2024.
Source: New York Times | By Eric Lipton
Nov. 3, 2022
Mining companies and environmentalists have long been at loggerheads over proposed projects in the Pacific that would provide new sources of metals for electric vehicles but threaten pristine underwater ecosystems.
Now the clash is taking on new urgency as a two-month test mission by a Canadian company comes to an end and international regulators debate whether to allow full-scale mining as early as 2024.
The pressing timetable has generated protests, including before the test ship launched from Rotterdam this year. More recently, officials from around the world — including Chile, Costa Rica, the Federated States of Micronesia, France, Germany, New Zealand and Spain — have called for a moratorium or a delay.
“There should not be any mining until and unless we can ensure the effective protection of the marine environment,” said Georgina Guillén-Grillo, who serves as Costa Rica’s delegate to the International Seabed Authority, an agency affiliated with the United Nations that has jurisdiction over deep-sea mining and is now meeting in Jamaica to hammer out proposed environmental requirements and decide next steps.
The test is being conducted by the Metals Company, a Vancouver-based firm, in the remote seabed between Hawaii and Mexico. A 130-person crew has been working around the clock since late September on a retrofitted oil-drilling ship, extracting what will be a total of 3,600 tons of rocks loaded with manganese, nickel and cobalt from 2.7 miles beneath the ocean’s surface.
The $250 million expedition, which also includes a companion ship with dozens of marine scientists equipped with underwater audio, video and water-quality-monitoring devices, is meant to evaluate the environmental impact of mining in waters so unknown that many plants and animals are not classified by science.
It is also the company’s first full-scale trial in the Pacific Ocean of its mining equipment. The machinery sucks up the rocks, known as polymetallic nodules, like a vacuum cleaner and feeds them through a series of riser pipes to the surface.
Anthony O’Sullivan, the company’s chief development officer, said that while the scientists’ work was not yet finished, mud and silt disturbed by the mining had not dispersed in ways that some feared could harm marine life.
“The seafloor plume is hugging the seafloor,” he said.
Still, the company’s own consultants acknowledged it was too early to draw any conclusions.
“There is really a lot of data to analyze before you can make an assessment of environmental impacts,” Thomas L. Johnson of DHI Group, hired by the Metals Company to study the sediment plume, said in a telephone interview from the expedition site.
The test mission has experienced some mishaps, including electrical wiring failures related to deep-sea pressures and the dumping of rock fragments and sediment-laden wastewater from the ship, according to documentation reviewed by The New York Times. A spokesman for the Metals Company said the discharge resulted from a surge in water flowing through a sediment-scrubbing device and “was not deemed to be a significant hazard or risk to the environment.” The test is scheduled to conclude by the middle of this month.
Matthew Gianni, a co-founder of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, said small amounts of dispersed sediment and the simple removal of the rocks — which are a habitat for many seabed organisms — may be enough to disrupt life.
“If you don’t even know species that are out there and how they react to this sediment, then you can’t make any assertion of what the biological impact of plumes will be,” he said. “Put the evidence on the table. Submit it to independent scientists to scrutinize and see if their assertions hold up. Until then, we cannot even talk about moving ahead on large-scale mining.”
The agency, with a staff of about 50, did not send a full-time employee on the expedition, and instead sent a trainee, a Metals Company official said. A Seabed Authority spokeswoman said the agency had tracked the project closely, sent staff to inspect the ships before they left and would do a follow-up visit when they returned “to verify that all offshore operations have been conducted in full compliance with relevant regulatory requirements.”
The test is taking place about 1,100 miles southwest of Manzanillo, Mexico, using remotely operated vehicles because the water is so deep and the pressure so intense it is generally too complicated to send workers. Marine historians say it is probably the largest ever collection of seabed nodules from the mineral-rich area, which is known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone.
The Metals Company initially plans to collect 1.3 million wet tons of the potato-size nodules a year and eventually ramp up to about 11.3 million tons. The excavation effort would last about two decades and generate as much as $31 billion in profits, according to company projections.
The metals in the seabed areas it controls, the company says, is enough to power 280 million electric vehicles, equivalent to the entire fleet of cars in the United States.
The company controls three of the 22 exploratory contractors granted authority by the agency to search for metals and gather environmental data, with the licenses covering approximately 580,000 square miles of the ocean floor. The company has announced it intends to submit an application next year to begin full-scale mining, which requires separate approval.
The Metals Company’s partners include Allseas Group, a Swiss-based offshore oil-industry contractor, Maersk, a Danish shipping company, and Glencore, a Swiss mining company, which has a deal to buy copper and nickel extracted from the nodules.
More than a decade ago, the Metals Company, through a corporate entity whose assets it now owns, recruited the tiny Pacific island of Nauru as a sponsor for mining in areas that were set aside by the Seabed Authority for poor or developing nations. The test mining is taking place in one of those areas.
The Times reported in August that the firm’s executives received key information from the Seabed Authority beginning in 2007, giving a major edge to their mining ambitions. The agency provided data identifying some of the most valuable seabed tracts, and then set aside the prized sites for the company’s future use, according to interviews and hundreds of pages of emails, letters and other internal documents. The company and the agency said there was nothing improper about the arrangement.
More recently, Nauru, on behalf of the Metals Company, invoked a provision that would compel the Seabed Authority to settle on environmental rules by next July. If the agency misses the deadline, the company can submit an application to begin mining, even without the regulations in place.
A growing number of Seabed Authority member states have pressed the agency’s governing body to block the maneuver and slow down the march toward full-scale mining.
“Current knowledge and available science is insufficient to approve deep-seabed mining until further notice,” the German government said in a statement this week as the Seabed Authority meetings started in Kingston, Jamaica.
Ms. Guillén-Grillo, the delegate from Costa Rica, has argued that the authority is not likely to finish its work by July 2023, and therefore should delay consideration of a mining application by the Metals Company.
“The authority has a big workload ahead,” she said. “We are dealing with the common heritage of mankind.”
Secret Data, Tiny Islands and a Quest for Treasure on the Ocean Floor
Deep-Sea Riches: Mining a Remote Ecosystem
An Investigation Leads to the Bottom of the Pacific
Eric Lipton is a Washington-based investigative reporter. A three-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize, he previously worked at The Washington Post and The Hartford Courant. @EricLiptonNYT
A version of this article appears in print on Nov. 4, 2022, Section A, Page 10 of the New York edition with the headline: Deep-Sea Mining Trial Nears End, and Debate Swells. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
Construction on 'old' US offshore wind leases 'tricky situation' for industry and at-risk whales
Construction on 'old' US offshore wind leases 'tricky situation' for industry and at-risk whales
Environmental groups urge caution building giant sea-based power plants off the state of Massachusetts as endangered North Atlantic right whale now inhabiting nearby waters
Source: Recharge News | By Tim Ferry
US environmentalists are urging caution developing giant wind plants off the coast of the state of Massachusetts in light of the increasing presence in nearby waters of the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale.
“We’re in a tricky situation in that these leases were issued a long time ago, and then the conditions have changed, and the whales are now in these areas,” Gib Brogan, fisheries campaign manager for environmental watchdog group Oceana, told Recharge.
“With the status of this species and the importance of that area, we need to be proceeding very cautiously.”
Offshore wind leases in the Massachusetts wind energy area (WEA) were originally sold in 2015, but since then this species of whale has taken up residence in neighbouring waters, drawn to the highly productive ecosystem as climate change-caused warming trends have degraded the species’ more southerly maritime habitats.
Protecting this species while accommodating offshore wind development has emerged as a key concern, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), the lead regulator of energy development in federal waters, is partnering with the fisheries department of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on a draft strategy to “protect and promote the recovery of North Atlantic right whales while responsibly developing offshore wind energy”.
“Working with NOAA on this draft strategy leverages the resources and expertise of both agencies to collect and apply the best available scientific information to inform our decisions,” said BOEM director Amanda Lefton.
Known as the “urban whale” due to its tendency to live near to urban population centers, fewer than 350 of the long-lived species are in existence. North Atlantic right whales have seen a 30% population decline since 2010, primarily caused by vessel collisions and entanglement with fishing gear.
Offshore wind construction in the Massachusetts WEA, which holds some 9GW of potential capacity, is set to spark a surge in vessel traffic. The 800MW Vineyard Wind 1, the US’ first offshore wind farm to begin construction, announced that 52 vessels have already been involved in its pre-installation work, with many more slated for foundation and turbine installation.
NOAA has lately rolled out restrictions on lobster fishing in local waters to protect the species, but fisheries advocates complain that protecting the species falls on them, while the offshore wind sector has received carte blanche in its development ambitions.
“It is somewhat difficult to comprehend that pile driving, noise-emitting steel turbines, enormous increases in vessel traffic, and introduction and movement of underwater materials in areas with the highest concentration of North Atlantic right whales would have substantially less impact on their overall survival than fishing rope,” fisheries advocate the Responsible Offshore Development Alliance (Roda) said in its comments to BOEM.
While restrictions on lobster fishing pose “an existential threat to this historic industry”, Roda said the government’s approach to North Atlantic right whale protection for the offshore wind sector “has been largely voluntary and based on negotiated agreements”.
Both Vineyard Wind 1 and the US’ second project to begin construction, 132MW South Fork, have entered into comprehensive agreements with environmental groups for the protection of the species that include constant monitoring for the whale’s presence, particularly during pile driving and other noise creating construction, and vessel speed limits.
Brogan said that while Oceana supports the responsible development of offshore wind, “we’re going to be making sure that these conditions are met, that monitoring is happening, that the mitigation measures are being administered effectively, that we have enough people out there that are looking for whales,” said Brogan.
Even these measures might not suffice to the protect the species from offshore wind's impacts, however, with a recent study published indicating that the industry could profoundly affect marine ecosystems.
Based on data acquired in northern Europe, home to some 28GW of offshore wind turbines, the study, published in the journal Communications Earth & Environment concluded “via numerical modelling that the associated wind wakes in the North Sea provoke large-scale changes in annual primary production with local changes of up to ±10% not only at the offshore wind farm clusters, but also distributed over a wider region”.
“Our results provide evidence that the ongoing offshore wind farm developments can have a substantial impact on the structuring of coastal marine ecosystems.”
North Atlantic right whales feed primarily on zooplankton, eating up to 2,500kg daily, and research indicates that most individuals are already food-stressed, resulting in lower fertility and smaller sizes.
Less productive feeding grounds would force them to travel farther afield for nourishment, exacerbating their poor condition. “Anything that's going to mess with their food source is a significant concern,” said Brogan.
BOEM and NOAA closed comments yesterday (5 December) on the draft strategy for North Atlantic right whale protection.
European electricity market: "We need a reform to stimulate low-carbon investments and guarantee supply"
Due to soaring electricity prices, several opposition representatives, from the Rassemblement national to La France insoumise, including the Republicans, are calling for an exit from the European electricity market to lower consumer bills. , citing the example of Spain and Portugal. While qualifying this market as "badly done for a very long time" , Emmanuel Macron promised, Thursday, January 5, for the second half of 2023 "a reform of the electricity market so that it depends [on] production costs" .
Source: LeMonde, The world | by some french dudes? and translated by Google
Posted january 6, 2023 at 06:00, updated at 06:00
Due to soaring electricity prices, several opposition representatives, from the Rassemblement national to La France insoumise, including the Republicans, are calling for an exit from the European electricity market to lower consumer bills. , citing the example of Spain and Portugal. While qualifying this market as "badly done for a very long time" , Emmanuel Macron promised, Thursday, January 5, for the second half of 2023 "a reform of the electricity market so that it depends [on] production costs" .
How does this market work? As electricity cannot be stored, the principle of the European system consists in guaranteeing the balance between supply and demand for electricity on a European scale, by calling on the least expensive means of production as a priority. When it is no longer enough, other means are brought in, always favoring the least expensive. But the market price depends on the cost of production of the last plant to come into operation, which is often gas-fired. The more the gas plants are in demand, the higher the market price. This is the case this winter, due to the shutdown of many French nuclear reactors and the war in Ukraine, which has caused gas prices to soar.
Several European countries using a lot of gas to produce electricity, such as Germany and Italy, the European electricity market, which sets a single price regardless of the means of production, may therefore seem unfair for a country like France which has a large nuclear fleet .
But is the European market solely responsible for the current price spike? Are Spain and Portugal really out of it? Would France have an interest in following their example? Interviewed by Le Monde , Nicolas Goldberg, expert at Colombus Consulting, delivers his analysis.
What is wrong with the European market?
Many of the reproaches made to the European market are in fact the result of a misunderstanding. What some politicians are saying is that electricity prices are pegged to gas prices because of the Germans and that's why their prices are high, but that's not true. This system has one virtue, which is that the balance between supply and demand is achieved at the lowest possible cost. Each producer has an interest in offering the lowest price in order to receive the marginal tariff [the difference between the cost of production and the tariff for the last kilowatt-hour produced]. This can, of course, generate excess profits, but they are currently taxed and this taxation feeds the tariff shields. The reproaches of political leaders are therefore unjustified and the Germans have nothing to do with it.
On the other hand, what can be criticized for this system is that it encourages the sizing of production capacities as accurately as possible. Today, France sometimes imports electricity when it could produce it, quite simply because it is cheaper. The European market guarantees this ability to import at the best price, which is a good thing for consumers. But that does not encourage us to invest in production capacities, which reduces our room for manoeuvre. When you encounter a problem such as corrosion of nuclear facilities or gas supply difficulties, there is a risk of a shortage, as we can see today. This is the reason why opposition leaders who do not understand this functioning or want to use it for political ends are asking for a way out, citing, wrongly, the example of Spain and Portugal.
Precisely, have these countries really left the European electricity market?
No, that's completely wrong. They remain fully integrated into it, but have obtained a temporary exemption which allows them to cap the wholesale price of gas and reduce consumer bills by only 10% to 15% because the cost of the device is re-invoiced to consumers. But this is also what other Member States of the European Union [EU] do indirectly with tariff shields financed by taxing excess profits . The French government tells us of a saving of 20%. It is therefore more effective than what Spain is doing, without the perverse effects .
One country has indeed left the European market, it is the United Kingdom. It is still connected to the European network and continues to import electricity, but negotiates it over the counter and the tariffs are necessarily higher than if it had remained there and decoupled from the rest of the EU. Strangely, the political leaders who want to get out of it do not cite this example...
So France would have no interest in leaving it?
The answer is clearly no, for two reasons. The first is that it lacks electricity today, which has not escaped anyone. However, the European market makes it possible to import massively at the best price, a price harmonized at European level. When France is an exporter, on the other hand, he guarantees us that there will always be outlets, even when our nuclear power stations are producing at full capacity, because this electricity is cheaper than fossil fuels and France can use these interconnections to export. In this case, we don't hear anyone saying that we have to get out of it.
This European market therefore has a double benefit: when we have overcapacity, it allows us to export at very good prices and bring in foreign currency; when we are short of capacity, which is rather the case at the moment, our supply remains guaranteed at the best price. The interconnections have also shown their good functioning this winter.
Should it, despite everything, be reformed?
I think it is necessary. The market was developed in a logic of great liberalisation, at a time – the 1990s – when the fight against climate change was not the primary concern and when the European electricity system was very overcapacity. It contributed to the closure of means of production, in particular coal-fired power stations, but did not encourage investment. This system is myopic. It does not encourage looking at things in the long term.
We need a reform to stimulate investment in low-carbon production and guarantee security of supply, which would also limit the effects of speculation. In normal times, the European market protects us from it, because there is no reason to speculate when security is guaranteed; this was not the case this summer, when the risk of a shortage emerged, which opened the way to speculation. Among the avenues for reform, there is therefore that of imposing prudential rules on electricity suppliers so that they hedge themselves in the long term and are less subject to the ups and downs of the market.
California raises sails on 'ambitious yet achievable' 25GW US Pacific floating wind voyage
California raises sails on 'ambitious yet achievable' 25GW US Pacific floating wind voyage
State energy policy agency recommendations point to first 5GW of deepwater plant turning by 2030 en route to 'maximum feasible' offshore capacity in next decades
Source: Recharge News | By Tim Ferry
The US state of California has set far-reaching targets for up to 5GW of floating wind power to brought online by the end of the decade and 25GW by 2045, exceeding the aspirations of even ardent industry supporters, and placing the Golden State on the path towards nationwide leadership in the sector.
The California Energy Commission (CEC), the state regulator in charge of energy policy, today (10 August) released its report to the California Natural Resources Agency and the state legislature per mandate of law AB525, signed last year by state governor Gavin Newsom, detailing its finding of the “maximum feasible” offshore wind capacity for the state.
“Today’s action solidified the goals as official state policy for planning purposes,” a CEC spokesperson told Recharge. “No further approvals are required.”
“California is home to one of the world’s best offshore wind resources... and I am confident that this clean, domestic source of electricity can play an important role in meeting our state’s growing need for clean energy,” said Newsom, in remarks cited at a business meeting of the CEC.
Last month, Newsom called on the CEC to raise its offshore wind target to at least 20GW by 2045.
CEC chair David Hochschild said: “These ambitious yet achievable goals are an important signal of how committed California is to bringing the offshore wind industry to our state”, adding: “this remarkable resource will… help us transition away from fossil fuel-based energy as quickly as possible while ensuring grid reliability.”
The CEC initially intended to submit its report 1 June this year, and as of May had set preliminary targets of 3GW of offshore wind by 2030 and 10-15GW by 2045 and up to 20GW by 2050.
However, calls by stakeholders and think-tanks, including a research team from the University of California Berkeley, urged the policy planners to am higher, to as much as 50GW by 2045, and the CEC withdrew its preliminary report to consider more ambitious targets.
Liz Burdock, CEO of sector business development body the Business Network for Offshore Wind, said that the raised targets “marks a significant moment in the path to develop a national floating offshore wind industry”.
“The long-term certainty of a 2045 goal will help build investor confidence and attract investments in ports, vessels, and offshore wind manufacturing facilities along the Pacific coast,” she said. “A new clean energy industry is born.”
The raised targets will provide enough electricity to power 3.75 million homes initially and many as 25 million by mid-century.
“These goals set an ambitious course and show that California is very serious about ‘going big’ on floating wind, to drive economies of scale and generate the very substantial clean power, climate, and jobs benefits this renewable energy resource can deliver for our state,” said Adam Stern, executive director of trade group Offshore Wind California.
“Achieving 5GW of offshore wind by 2030 will position the state to meet and even exceed its 25GW goal by 2045.”
This report is the first of several products the CEC must prepare to create a strategic plan for offshore wind energy development as required by state law, and will be followed by reports on economic benefits specific to offshore-wind related port and workforce development, and a third drawing a permitting roadmap for the sector.
“Adopting a goal of 25GW by 2045 sends a critical signal that California is ready to meet this moment—and gives the state’s clean energy companies the green light that we need to get to work, at scale, to provide the clean power Californians are going to rely on for decades to come,” said Alex Jackson, director of American Clean Power-California, an industry lobby group.
California has some of the nation’s top wind resources, estimated by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at 200GW of technical potential, with wind speeds particularly along the state’s northern coastlines exceeding 9.5 metres per second, as well as a huge economy and population of nearly 40 million to drive demand.
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), the regulator of energy development in federal waters, has proposed a lease auction for the end of this year for 373,000-acres in the Morro Bay and Humboldt wind energy areas (WEA) with up to 4.5GW of capacity which has already attracted 23 qualified bidders, including some of the world’s biggest offshore wind developers, such as Equinor, RWE, Shell and TotalEnergies.
Yet the industry will face multiple hurdles, including deep waters exceeding 1,000 metres, requiring nascent floating platforms, as well as a severe lack of port or supply chain capacity, qualified personnel, and transmission infrastructure.
The CEC based the planning goals primarily on the mandates of SB100 – the 2018 California state law calling for 60% renewable energy by 2030 and 100% clean energy by 2045, as well the need to quickly begin addressing bottlenecks that could derail the industry’s rollout.
“Achieving a 2030 online date for any proposed offshore wind project [to contribute to the state’s 5GW target] will take a significant mobilisation of effort and resources, and timely infrastructure investments, among other factors,” said the CEC.
“The CEC will work with state and federal partners to identify process steps and milestones that could allow for a 2030 online date for California’s first offshore wind projects.”
8,000% growth | 'More than 100GW of hydrogen electrolysers to be produced annually by 2031'
8,000% growth | 'More than 100GW of hydrogen electrolysers to be produced annually by 2031'
Sector will experience compound annual growth of 62.6%, with Europe leading the way, says Guidehouse Insights report
Source: Recharge News | By Leigh Collins
The global production of electrolysers — the machines that split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen using an electric current — will grow exponentially over the next nine years, according to a new report by analyst Guidehouse Insights.
The annual manufacturing capacity will grow from about 1.3GW at the end of this year to 104.6GW by 2031 — an increase of almost 8,000%, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 62.6%, the US-based company says in its study, Market Data: Electrolyzers.
While the 104.6GW figure is far higher than the 47GW of electrolysers expected to be manufactured annually (by 2030) by US investment bank Jefferies, it is still well below the 180GW foreseen to be in use by the end of the decade under the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Announced Pledges Scenario — and even further behind the 850GW the IEA says is needed to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.
Nevertheless, it still represents massive growth for an industry that has only installed about 200MW of electrolysers to date, according to Aurora Energy Research.
“The market for electrolyzers is expected to experience tremendous growth through the forecast period,” the Guidehouse report says. “This growth is expected to be driven by factors such as decreasing capital costs, declining feedstock costs, and an overall push for decarbonization. Additionally, policies, such as subsidies, limits on fossil fuels, and carbon taxes, can drive the market even further.”
It adds that it expects the electrolyser manufacturing market to be led by Europe, followed by Asia Pacific, then North America, Latin America and the Middle East & Africa.
At least 14 gigawatt-scale electrolyser factories have been announced to date — adding up to 26GW — by the following manufacturers:
Thyssenkrupp (5GW, Germany)
ITM Power (5GW, UK)
Plug Power (1GW in US; 1GW in South Korea; 2GW in Australia, with partner Fortescue Future Industries)
John Cockerill (1GW in France; 2GW in India, in conjunction with Greenko)
Siemens Energy (1GW in Germany, but eventually ‘multi-gigawatt’)
Cummins (1GW in Spain, with Iberdrola; and 1GW in China, with Sinopec)
Nel (2GW, Norway)
Ohmium (India, 2GW)
McPhy (France, 1GW)
Sunfire (Germany, 1GW)
Battery safety
The batteries that power many of your household devices and children's toys contain harmful substances, like acids, that can cause serious injury and even death if swallowed by a child. They can also pose a risk of fire or explosion.
The tips here can help you and your children avoid serious injury from batteries. Learn how to safely install, use, store and dispose of batteries.
Source: Government of Canada | Author unknown
Date modified: 2022-01-21
The batteries that power many of your household devices and children's toys contain harmful substances, like acids, that can cause serious injury and even death if swallowed by a child. They can also pose a risk of fire or explosion.
The tips here can help you and your children avoid serious injury from batteries. Learn how to safely install, use, store and dispose of batteries.
Health risks
Many batteries, such as button batteries, are small enough to be swallowed by children. This can cause serious internal injuries and even death.
Batteries, such as lithium-ion batteries, can also overheat, leak, burst, and even explode and catch fire, causing serious injuries if they are not properly:
installed
used
stored
disposed
Report any battery-related injuries directly to the manufacturer. You can also Report an Incident Involving a Consumer Product to Health Canada.
Button batteries
If you suspect your child has swallowed a button battery, seek immediate emergency medical attention. Do not wait for symptoms to develop.
A swallowed button battery can result in significant injury and death. It is important to act quickly if your child has swallowed a button battery.
A button battery can lodge in a child’s throat where an electrical current is triggered by saliva causing a chemical reaction that can burn through the esophagus in as little as 2 hours.
Several health organizations, including Ontario Poison Centre and Alberta Health Services advise giving your child honey on the way to the emergency department to reduce the risk of serious injury. Do not delay getting your child to the nearest hospital.
Button batteries can be found in many household items that are accessible to children, such as:
toys
watches
calculators
reading lights
flameless candles
laser pointers
musical greeting cards
small electronic devices (like remote controls)
singing books
light up/flashing jewellery
hearing aids
key chain accessories
kitchen and bathroom scales
thermometers
Safety Tips
Know the products in your home that contain button batteries.
Check regularly that button battery compartments are secure.
Look for products with battery compartments that prevent easy access. For example, screw-closed compartments are harder to access than those that simply slide to open.
Always supervise children when they use products containing button batteries.
Do not allow children to play with button batteries or remove them from household products.
Never store button batteries near food and/or medicine.
When replacing button batteries, make sure that used batteries are discarded quickly and properly. Even used or expired batteries can cause life-threatening injuries.
Place pieces of non-conductive tape (packing, scotch or electrical tape) on either side of button batteries after removing them from products and before disposing of them.
Lithium-ion (also known as Li-ion) batteries
The use of rechargeable lithium-ion batteries in consumer products is very common and they are generally considered safe to use. But as with any energy storage device they carry safety risks including overheating, fires and explosions. Lithium-ion batteries are more susceptible to being damaged than other types of batteries and can become hazardous in certain conditions. Take precautions when using, charging and storing these batteries.
Lithium-ion batteries are found in many electronic devices, such as:
laptops
cell phones
power tools
hoverboards
vaping products (e-cigarettes)
Charging your lithium-ion battery
Lithium-ion batteries can overheat, catch fire or explode if they are not charged in a safe manner. Follow these precautions to help minimize risks associated with charging your lithium-ion battery:
Allow batteries to come to room temperature before charging
Never attempt to charge a battery in below freezing temperatures
Do not exceed the recommended charging time
Do not charge your device on soft surfaces, such as a couch or bed. Soft surfaces can trap heat around the battery
Use your battery charger in a place you can keep an eye on it in case it overheats
Use the charger that came with your device. If you need to buy or replace a charger, make sure the voltage and current are compatible with your device
Make sure to use a charger that has one of the recognized Canadian certification marks, such as CSA, cUL or cETL. These marks indicate that the products are assessed to the required Canadian electrical safety standards. Chargers that do not meet the required electrical safety standards may cause electric shock and fire hazards for consumers. For more information on certification marks, visit your provincial or territorial Electrical Safety Authority.
Do not use uncertified chargers.
Reduce your risk
Installation
Do not allow children to install batteries
When installing alkaline batteries, be sure to line up the "+" sign on the battery with the "+" sign on the product's battery compartment. Improper installation can cause a battery to leak or overheat and lead to serious injury
Do not use different types of batteries together
Do not mix old batteries with new ones
Do not mix rechargeable batteries with non-rechargeable ones
Use
Always read and follow instructions on battery packaging
Do not use batteries that:
are swollen
are dented
have torn plastic wrappers
show other signs of damage or wear
Buy your batteries from a trusted source
Batteries are not toys. Do not let children handle them
Do not allow children to take battery-operated items to bed. Burns and other injuries can occur if the batteries leak or overheat during the night
Do not leave battery-operated devices, like cell phones and laptops, on your bed while you sleep, especially while charging
Do not attempt to recharge batteries that are not rechargeable
Do not attempt to repair a device containing a battery if it is not recommended by the manufacturer. Damage to a lithium-ion battery can result in hazards, such as overheating, fire or explosions
Storage
Batteries can catch fire or even explode when in contact with metal. Do not store batteries where they can touch metal, like coins, or keys, such as in a pocket or handbag
Store batteries in their original packaging and in a cool, dark place away from household chemicals
Store batteries away from medicine and food so that they are not swallowed by accident
Store batteries out of children's reach and sight
Carry batteries for your vaping product in a protective, non-metal case
Remove batteries from devices that will not be used for an extended period of time, such as seasonal decorations
Do not store batteries in a sub-freezing environment, such as your freezer
Disposal
Avoid throwing batteries out in household garbage. Many retailers and local governments have battery recycling programs that allow you to drop off old batteries. Contact your local government for a list of drop-off centres
Never toss batteries into a fire. They might burst or explode
Be sure batteries cannot be pulled out of the trash by a child. Spent batteries can still pose health risks and cause serious or fatal injuries
It's H2-go | Why 2023 will be green hydrogen's global lift-off year
Subsidy schemes kicking in this year in key economies will all but guarantee profitability for projects that will need huge new sources of renewable power
Subsidy schemes kicking in this year in key economies will all but guarantee profitability for projects that will need huge new sources of renewable power, writes Leigh Collins
3 January 2023 10:47 GMT UPDATED 3 January 2023 11:17 GMT
Source: Recharge News | By Leigh Collins
The next 12 months will transform the global green hydrogen industry from a much-discussed idea to large-scale reality, with a wave of government subsidy schemes entering into force that will virtually guarantee profitability for renewable H2 projects which will in turn need huge amounts of clean power to operate.
The most significant support programme will almost certainly be the US hydrogen tax credits — unveiled in last year’s Inflation Reduction Act — which would pay producers up to $3 per kilogram of green H2. But Contracts for Difference (CfD) subsidy programmes from the EU and UK are also due to begin this year, along with Germany’s H2Global scheme, which will provide financial support for clean hydrogen (and its derivatives) imported from outside the EU.
In addition, Canada said it will unveil a hydrogen tax credit scheme in the spring of 2023; Oman will unveil the winners of its first green hydrogen tender in March, and its second in December; India is expected to unveil a new subsidy programme in the coming months; Norway has agreed in principle to introduce a CfD scheme this year; while China is set to significantly expand its green H2 output in 2023.
Very little, if any, government cash is expected to enter producers’ bank accounts this year due to the simple fact that money will be paid out for H2 production or usage rather than project construction — and projects may take many months or years to become operational.
On top of this, most of the subsidy schemes are yet to be finalised and it is not clear exactly when they will be.
However, many large-scale green hydrogen projects will almost certainly reach final investment decisions this year on the back of the subsidies, with construction beginning by the end of 2023 — with billions of dollars flowing to businesses, including contractors, advisors and manufacturers of electrolysis equipment, wind turbines and solar panels.
And let’s not forget that despite all the talk about clean hydrogen in recent years, only 270MW of green H2 projects are currently in operation, despite a staggering 957GW having been announced according to UK analyst Aurora Energy Research.
So where do all the different green hydrogen subsidy schemes stand today?
US H2 tax credits
The Inflation Reduction Act, which was signed into law by President Joe Biden on 16 August 2022, offers tax credits of up to $3/kg to US clean hydrogen producers for the first ten years of a project’s lifetime.
The size of the tax credit depends on the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of each project, as well as how much staff are paid (see panel at end of article for details).
The maximum tax credit would effectively make green hydrogen cheaper to produce than grey H2 made from unabated fossil gas in most of the US and the world, according to cost estimates from analyst Platts.
The final details of the subsidy scheme are still being devised by the US government, including rules on the temporal correlation of renewable energy and H2 production — but these are expected to be revealed in the coming months.
However, they could be delayed somewhat as the EU, Norway, Australia and South Korea have officially complained to the US government that the Inflation Reduction Act — which includes a host of climate-reduction measures and associated subsidies — breaches international trade rules by giving preferential treatment to US-made products.
A high-level EU-US Inflation Reduction Act Task Force has been set up in an attempt to head off a potentially damaging trade battle between the two over the subsidies, which has so far seen modest success, while President Biden has also pledged to “tweak glitches” in the act.
But the notion that the US can make changes to the law — as requested by the EU — seems highly unlikely given the initial struggle to get all Democratic senators on board and the fact that the Republican lawmakers have taken control of the House of Representatives.
However, the US is still expected to be the most attractive market for green hydrogen production in 2023, due to both the tax credits and the $9.5bn of federal cash made available for the development of clean H2 in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, passed by the US in 2021.
This includes $8bn — to be allocated in the fiscal years 2022-26 — to help establish at least four regional clean hydrogen hubs, which the infrastructure bill defines as “network[s] of clean hydrogen producers, potential clean hydrogen consumers, and connective infrastructure located in close proximity... that can be developed into a national clean hydrogen network to facilitate a clean hydrogen economy”.
EU’s Carbon Contracts for Difference
The European Commission announced in May 2022 that it will roll out Carbon Contracts for Difference (CCfD) subsides for green hydrogen using cash from its Innovation Fund “to support a full switch of the existing hydrogen production in industrial processes from natural gas to renewables and the transition to hydrogen-based production processes in new industrial sectors such as steel-making”.
This has been designed to help meet the EU’s target of producing ten million tonnes of green hydrogen annually inside the bloc by 2030, and importing a further ten million tonnes by the same date
Under this scheme, end users (rather than producers) would be paid a guaranteed amount by governments for avoiding CO2 emissions. This would consist of savings made by not paying a carbon price under the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS), plus a top-up subsidy to reach the “strike price” agreed in the CCfD.
The amount actually paid by governments would therefore depend on the fluctuating ETS carbon price, and would mean that if it exceeded the strike price, end users would actually pay the difference back to the government.
The final details of the green H2 scheme were due to be published last year, but was delayed after the European Parliament voted against the European Commission’s proposal for hourly proof of dedicated renewable energy supply to electrolysers.
A new compromise draft proposal — to allow quarterly matching of dedicated renewable energy supply to hydrogen production until 2028, which would then be replaced with hour-by-hour correlation — was widely expected to be officially unveiled in mid-December, but the year ended with no word on the matter.
This proposed rules would still need to be officially agreed by the 27 member states and the European Parliament, but the Commission is keen to get the CCfD scheme implemented as soon as possible to give the bloc a fighting chance of reaching its target of producing ten million tonnes of green hydrogen annually by 2030.
The rules are also expected to apply to renewable H2 imported into the EU.
On top of all this, the EU gave the go-ahead in September for member states to subsidise 3.5GW of new electrolysis capacity under the Hy2Use programme.
Germany's H2Global
Germany’s multi-billion-euro H2Global green hydrogen subsidy programme — which is only available to H2 (and derivatives) imported into the EU — is the most advanced of all the schemes, but funding is not expected to start flowing to producers until 2024 at the earliest.
Last month, the German government unveiled two tenders for imported renewable hydrogen derivatives — one for green ammonia, and the other for green methanol and H2-based sustainable aviation fuels — supported by an initial €900m ($959m) tranche of funding.
Under H2Global's unique double-auction scheme, a special purpose-company owned by the German government called the Hydrogen Intermediary Network Company (HintCo) will buy green hydrogen or its derivatives from international producers via ten-year Hydrogen Purchase Agreements (HPAs), before selling it on to European customers, who will bid for short-term supply contracts via separate tenders.
The supply contracts will be awarded to the highest bidders but in the event that they fall short of the cost of the HPA, the difference will be made up by HintCo using funds from the German government.
As the commercial risk will be assumed by HintCo, H2Global will provide international green hydrogen producers with long-term price and demand certainty the need to develop their projects, while also securing a supply for European customers.
German chancellor Olaf Scholz has already cleared a total of €4bn of funding for H2Global, but the EU has so far only given the green light to the first tranche of €900m.
The government intends to complete the HPA auctions by mid-2023, but does not plan to launch the supply auctions until 2024-25.
UK’s CfD scheme
The UK announced in April 2022 that it would finalise a Contracts for Difference (CfD) subsidy scheme for clean hydrogen by the end of the year, and in July it invited green H2 developers to register “expressions of interest” in the scheme — the first part of the application process.
The government promised that support for up to 1GW of green hydrogen projects would be awarded “via two allocation rounds in 2023 (opening in 2022) and 2024 (opening in 2023)”, all of which would be operational or under construction by 2025. The first funding round would support about 250MW of projects, it said.
But the CfD programme has yet to be finalised — no doubt due to the fact that Britain has seen three different Conservative prime ministers in office since last July.
In April 2022, the government explained that the H2 CfD would offer a subsidy representing “the difference between a ‘strike price’ reflecting the cost of producing hydrogen and a ‘reference price’ reflecting the market value of hydrogen”.
Essentially, this would enable green hydrogen to be available to the market at the same price as grey hydrogen produced from unabated fossil gas.
Green — and blue — hydrogen remains a UK government priority, with an updated national hydrogen strategy last month revealing that Westminster aims “to issue final grant offer letters in early 2023” to shortlisted green hydrogen developers that registered expressions of interest.
A market engagement exercise about a second funding round for renewable H2 would be launched in the second quarter of 2023, it stated in December.
In addition, the devolved Scottish government last month unveiled its own £90m ($112m) Green Hydrogen Fund and said it would open a “call for proposals” for renewable H2 projects in early 2023, as part of its bid to install 5GW of clean H2 by 2030, and 25GW by 2045.
But details as to how the money would be allocated have not yet been revealed.
Canada
Canada announced in November that it would introduce a new tax credit of up to 40% for hydrogen production, as part of an effort to bring the country’s incentive regime in line with the generous H2 subsidies available over the border in the US.
The scheme is due to be introduced in the Spring, and run until 2030.
The Canadian model plans to mirror the US regime by making the tax credits scaleable dependent on a range of factors, including carbon intensity and labour conditions.
An upcoming public consultation will determine a carbon-intensity system, as well as the level of support for each hydrogen production pathway, including green hydrogen produced from renewable energy and blue H2 made with fossil gas and carbon capture and storage, according to the country's finance department.
India
The Indian government first unveiled plans to make India a major green hydrogen producer in November 2020, and in August 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced during his annual Independence Day speech that the country would become “a global hub for green hydrogen production and export”.
At the time, power and renewable energy minister RK Singh said that India would compel oil refiners and fertiliser manufacturers to use set amounts of green hydrogen from 2023-24.
Little more was heard about the plans until February 2022, when the government announced that India aimed to produce five million tonnes of green hydrogen annually by 2030 as part of an “interim” hydrogen strategy. This also included a plan for green hydrogen producers to be able to waive electricity transmission fees, which according to one senior Indian oil company executive could reduce power costs of renewable H2 projects by as much as 75%.
Then, last month, the Indian parliament passed a new law that would allow the government to force “designated consumers” to buy a certain amount of “non-fossil” energy or feedstock — paving the way for the government to issue green hydrogen mandates to H2 users.
Singh told Parliament that the government plans to mandate the use of green hydrogen in sectors such as steel, oil refining, fertiliser production and cement production. India currently consumes about 17 million tonnes of grey hydrogen per year, according to the University of Oxford, so this could be extremely significant.
Two weeks later, on 27 December 2022, Reuters reported that India is planning a $2bn incentive programme for the green hydrogen industry, attributing the news to three unnamed sources, including a “senior government official”.
This official stated that these incentives could be announced in the forthcoming budget for the fiscal year beginning on 1 April, but the Indian government has so far declined to comment.
Nevertheless, it is widely expected that India will be a major green hydrogen player in 2023.
What about China?
Green hydrogen production is also expected to expand significantly in China in 2023, with the world’s largest project — a 260MW facility being built in Xinjiang by local oil giant Sinopec — due to be completed around the middle of the year.
And as Hydrogen Insight reported in November, electrolyser sales in China are expected to more than double this year as the country continues to roll out green hydrogen projects — many of which have been delayed due to Covid or supply-chain disruptions.
According to Eric Lin, a board member at John Cockerill’s Chinese manufacturing arm, Cockerill Jingli Hydrogen, about 1.5-2GW of electrolysers will be sold in 2023, up from 600-700MW this year.
Trial by typhoon awaits 'world first' floating solar linked to wind turbine off China
Trial by typhoon awaits 'world first' floating solar linked to wind turbine off China
Development giant SPIC and Norwegian technology pioneer deploy PV arrays connected to turbine in exposed seas off Shandong province
Source: Recharge News | By Andrew Lee
Chinese development giant SPIC and a Norwegian solar pioneer are claiming a world first after deploying an offshore floating PV plant integrated with a wind turbine – and now hope it passes a testing typhoon season off China.
The hybrid plant off Shandong province uses floating PV arrays designed by Norway’s Ocean Sun linked to an SPIC offshore wind turbine and sharing its power export cable.
The twin 0.5MW floating arrays will act as a pilot for a planned 20MW project in 2023, said Ocean Sun, which is working with partners around the world to commercialise its patented 'flotation ring' polymer membrane technology.
The company claimed the link with wind power would help drive down cost of energy by boosting output and believes “a large market” will emerge for hybrid offshore deployments. Major players such as RWE have already unveiled plans for their own projects in the North Sea.
While deployment of floating PV on inland surfaces such as lakes and reservoirs is already booming, placing solar at sea presents a new level of challenge due to the harsh conditions facing equipment offshore.
Ocean Sun CEO Børge Bjørneklett said earlier this year that the waters off Shandong “see annual typhoons with challenging sea state, and all involved parties are aware of the risks. In all circumstances, Ocean Sun will improve our product with learnings from this exposed site”.
The pilot now has to survive one typhoon season to “show its robustness”.
Bjørneklett claimed to Recharge in an interview last year that ocean-based PV has the potential to beat floating wind in terms of growth.
“The application area is so much larger [than for floating wind] if you look at irradiation maps of the world, particularly in Southeast Asia.”
The Ocean Sun CEO also said the technology has onshore solar in its sights.
“I think to be a bit futuristic, people will ask themselves why they put up solar panels on land at all,” he said.
Clean energy is more than just a lesson at UniSC. It’s how we power our largest campus.
Rather than a traditional battery – which poses disposal problems for the environment – UniSC uses a thermal energy storage tank, mostly consisting of water. That means minimal waste when it comes time to replace. The water, once chilled using the power of the sun, is used in air conditioners across the Sunshine Coast campus, resulting in a massive leap towards our goal to become carbon neutral by 2025.
Source: University of the sunshine coast, University of Southern California | author unknown
To embrace Australia’s steady supply of sunshine, we have installed 6,000+ solar panels to power a “water battery” that cuts our energy use by 40 percent. It's a first for an Australian university.
HOW DOES IT WORK?
Rather than a traditional battery – which poses disposal problems for the environment – UniSC uses a thermal energy storage tank, mostly consisting of water. That means minimal waste when it comes time to replace. The water, once chilled using the power of the sun, is used in air conditioners across the Sunshine Coast campus, resulting in a massive leap towards our goal to become carbon neutral by 2025. And the best part is – there was no capital outlay. Veolia delivered the infrastructure as part of the broader agreement.
Highlights
$100m savings over 25 years
No capital outlay by UniSC
Over 100,000 tonnes CO2 saved
4.5 ML thermal energy storage tank
6,000+ solar panels generating 2.1 megawatts of power
Plant room with latest PV-integrated roofing
Environmentally-friendly refrigerant gas
Real-time monitoring system
Use of lake water to save a further 802 ML of potable water
Smart system checks the weather
The best option for energy changes from hour to hour. UniSC opted for a system that reacts to changing conditions in real-time. Depending on what the weather is doing and various other factors, the system will react to changing conditions and shift energy between the solar panels, mains electricity and thermal energy storage tank. This ensures the campus is using the best source of energy that optimises energy use, carbon emissions and cost.
Partnership with Veolia
The key to the success of the project was a strong partnership with Veolia, a global company that delivers renewable energy solutions. Veolia installed the panels and tank at no cost to UniSC. They operate and maintain the infrastructure and sell the energy generated back to the University at a rate cheaper than electricity from the grid. After a 10-year period, ownership of the infrastructure will transfer to UniSC. Over the 25-year life of the project, UniSC will save $100m on buying electricity from the grid, and any additional electricity costs are quickly eclipsed by the saving.
Tax Credits for Electric Vehicles Are About to Get Confusing
Tax Credits for Electric Vehicles Are About to Get Confusing
Foreign-made cars no longer qualify. General Motors should become eligible again. But officials are still working on the fine print.
Source: New York Times | By Jack Ewing
Dec. 29, 2022
Next year could be confusing for anyone shopping for an electric car.
A law that takes effect on Jan. 1 will both expand and scramble the list of vehicles that qualify for federal tax credits of up to $7,500 in ways that officials and carmakers are still trying to sort out.
The Biden administration on Thursday put out a new list of cars that will qualify for the credits. That list, which included models from Ford Motor, Nissan, Rivian, Volkswagen, Stellantis, Tesla and Volvo, is not complete, and the Treasury Department said it would be added to “over the coming days and weeks.”
Although they were not included on the list, models from General Motors, which had exceeded a cap on the number of cars that could collect subsidies under an older law, are expected to be eligible again in January because the new law, the Inflation Reduction Act, abolishes the cap. But imported cars that qualified under the old law will no longer be eligible; these include vehicles made by brands like Hyundai and Kia.
Even when the list published on Thursday is complete, it might be good for only three months or so because officials plan to carry out other parts of the law in March. That is when the Biden administration plans to put in place new rules intended to force carmakers to buy batteries and raw materials from suppliers in the United States and its trade allies. Very few if any electric cars might qualify right away after those rules go into effect, auto experts said.
The Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by President Biden in August, was designed to promote battery-powered vehicles while providing incentives for companies to make them in North America. It is also designed to exclude rivals like China and Russia from the supply chain.
But the details of how to apply those principles were left to the Treasury, which has had only four months to work through scores of brain-numbing technical details not fully addressed in the legislation.
For example, for a vehicle to qualify for credits, at least 40 percent of the minerals in its battery, measured by their value, must come from the United States or a trade ally. The quota rises in steps to 80 percent in 2027. But it is devilishly difficult to track the origin of raw materials. And the law didn’t specify which countries should be considered trade allies.
A preliminary list issued by the Treasury on Thursday includes countries like Chile, Nicaragua and Singapore because they have trade agreements with the United States. But it excludes the European Union, with which the United States does not have a trade pact. (Officials left open the possibility that countries could be added to the list later.)
Federal regulators face a dilemma. If they interpret the law too strictly, carmakers may not even try to qualify for the credits. If they interpret the law too liberally, it might not achieve one of its key aims — to compel carmakers to create jobs in the United States and pivot supply chains away from China or other geopolitical adversaries.
China dominates the processing of battery raw materials like lithium and graphite, and it controls mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the source of most of the world’s cobalt, an essential battery ingredient.
Since August, only cars assembled in the United States, Canada or Mexico have been eligible for the full credit of $7,500. On Jan. 1, the law abolishes a limit of 200,000 vehicles per manufacturer under an older law.
After March, or whenever the Treasury Department decides how to enforce the limitations on imported battery minerals and battery components, the rules will get a lot tougher. It’s possible that no vehicles will qualify immediately.
In other words, car buyers might have a brief window — from January to March — to collect the full credit. Then they will have to wait months or years for mines to begin producing ore in friendly countries, refineries to be built and domestic battery assembly lines to start rolling, analysts say.
Pablo Di Si, the chief executive of Volkswagen of America, which builds electric vehicles in Chattanooga, Tenn., and Mexico, has pleaded for automakers to be given a few years to adapt. “When you have an industry that has been disrupted the way we have been disrupted,” he said in an interview, “you cannot make these sudden changes in technology, in production, in mineral extraction.”
It is considered unlikely that Congress will revise the law, given that Republicans will soon control the House. Even with Democratic control of both houses, the Inflation Reduction Act passed only after the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, made major concessions to Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, who had initially joined Republicans in opposing it.
But it appears that the Treasury will try to give carmakers and buyers a break by interpreting the law flexibly. For example, a battery component that is assembled in the United States, Canada or Mexico will probably pass muster even if it is made from imported parts, the Treasury Department said Wednesday in a preliminary report.
Some aspects of the law are fairly clear. Well-heeled car buyers — defined as those whose modified adjusted gross income on their tax returns is $150,000 for individuals and $300,000 for couples — won’t be able to claim credits.
Sport utility vehicles, vans and pickups are eligible for credits only if the manufacturer’s suggested list price is less than $80,000. For sedans and other vehicles, the price cap is $55,000. For plug-in hybrids, the size of the tax credit depends on battery size, at least until March.
That means pricey electric vehicles from companies like Mercedes-Benz and Lucid will probably not qualify even though they are made in the United States. Either their sticker prices are too high or their customers are too rich.
How to classify vehicles is another issue. Officials are likely to define an S.U.V. more narrowly than carmakers’ marketing departments do.
There is a loophole in the law that could provide a way for consumers to take advantage of the credits even for vehicles that don’t meet domestic sourcing requirements.
The act exempts commercial vehicles from the mineral and battery sourcing quotas, and the requirement that vehicles be made in North America. Auto industry lobbyists want the administration to interpret that provision to mean that cars purchased by leasing companies are commercial vehicles.
If that argument flies, and the Treasury Department indicated Thursday that it will, rental companies, ride-share services and leasing companies could collect credits on imported vehicles or those with foreign parts and pass the savings on to their customers.
The loophole angered Mr. Manchin, who on Thursday accused the Biden administration of bending to industry pressure and undermining policies designed to “bring our energy and manufacturing supply chains onshore to protect our national security, reduce our dependence on foreign adversaries and create jobs right here in the United States.”
Mr. Manchin said he would introduce legislation that “prevents this dangerous interpretation from Treasury from moving forward.”
The exception for leasing companies may help mollify Asian and European allies who have complained the Inflation Reduction Act discriminates against their carmakers. South Korean leaders are particularly aggrieved.
South Korea is a close military ally of the United States, and Hyundai is investing $5.5 billion to build batteries and electric vehicles in Georgia. But the plant, which will employ 8,000 people, won’t begin mass-producing vehicles until 2025.
Until then, the rules are a blow to Hyundai’s ambitions in the United States, where its Ioniq 5 has been a very popular electric model. During the first nine months of the year, Hyundai and its sister brand Kia had almost 8 percent of the U.S. electric vehicle market, second only to Tesla, which had a commanding 64 percent, according to Kelley Blue Book. Hyundai has asked that its vehicles qualify for credits until the Georgia operation is up and running, but it appears unlikely that U.S. officials will grant that request.
For the first time, used electric vehicles will be eligible for credits of up to $4,000. There are restrictions. The credit applies only to vehicles sold for less than $25,000 that are at least two years old. Buyers can’t earn more than $150,000 if they file taxes as a married couple, and no more than $75,000 if they file singly. The credit applies to a vehicle just once, and buyers can’t claim a credit more than once every three years.
Still, the credit means that electric vehicles ought to be more accessible to middle-income buyers. “It has the potential to transform the way the used-car industry works,” said Scott Case, chief executive of Recurrent, a firm that tracks the used electric vehicle market.
For buyers confused by all these new rules, there will be ways to know whether vehicles they’re considering will be eligible for the tax credits. Recurrent’s website allows buyers to type in a vehicle identification number and find out whether a used car is eligible.
One way that buyers can ensure that they’ll receive the credit is to insist that dealers apply it to the purchase price. That was not allowed under the old rules but will be possible beginning in 2024. The change will help people whose taxes are too low to claim the full credit.
For all their complaints about the way the Inflation Reduction Act was written, carmakers generally like the legislation. Speaking to investors in October, Jim Farley, the chief executive of Ford, noted that the law contained subsidies for battery production that were separate from the tax credits for car buyers that could be worth $7 billion for the company and its suppliers through 2026. Those subsidies should help reduce electric vehicle prices.
The Inflation Reduction Act, Mr. Farley said, will “have a wide range of positive impacts for both our customers and for Ford.”
Jack Ewing writes about business from New York, focusing on the auto industry and the transition to electric cars. He spent much of his career in Europe and is the author of “Faster, Higher, Farther," about the Volkswagen emissions scandal. @JackEwingNYT • Facebook
Turn Red Planet green with wind turbines to unlock new Mars missions: NASA
Turn Red Planet green with wind turbines to unlock new Mars missions: NASA
Scientists say research shows wind can take place alongside solar and nuclear as 'valuable' energy source to sustain life on Martian surface
Source: Recharge News | By Andrew Lee
Wind energy is “a valuable energy resource for future human missions to Mars” that could open new areas of the Red Planet for exploration, according to a team of scientists that urged more research into how turbines can support life under Martian conditions.
Once written off as a source of power due to conditions on Mars’ surface – where low atmospheric density results in wind forces typically 1% those seen on Earth – new research led by Victoria Hartwick of the NASA Ames Research Centre in California claims technological advances such as tapping low wind speeds and operating in extreme environments now “favour a Martian application”.
Wind turbines on Mars could prove particularly valuable as a complement to nuclear and solar energy, offering greater safety levels than the former and potentially able to function when the latter is engulfed in dust storms, say the researchers in a new paper published in Nature Astronomy that uses what’s claimed as “a state-of-the-art Mars global climate model”.
“We find that wind speeds at some proposed landing sites are sufficiently fast to provide a stand-alone or complementary energy source to solar or nuclear power,” said the scientists, adding that “wind power represents a stable, sustained energy resource across large portions of the Mars surface” that could help open up 13 new 'regions of interest' on the planet for human exploration.
Part of their calculations were based on power curve figures from an Enercon 33 turbine operating at the Ross Island wind farm in Antarctica as “an analogue site for present day Mars”.
Wind power represents a stable, sustained energy resource.
“We encourage additional study aimed at advancing wind turbine technology to operate efficiently under Mars conditions and to extract more power from Mars winds,” said the researchers.
They flagged a host of technical challenges that would need to be overcome, ranging from lightweight designs for transport to Mars to the need to operate in ultra-challenging temperature and dust conditions.
'Wrong side of history' | Wake up to the hype around green hydrogen for heating
'Wrong side of history' | Wake up to the hype around green hydrogen for heating
OPINION | No colour of H2 makes sense to decarbonise heating, and pretending otherwise risks delaying urgent action to slash emissions, write Richard Lowes and David Cebon
Source: Recharge News | By Richard Lowes and David Cebon
Governments around the world are developing strategies and suites of policies to support their climate change mitigating ‘net-zero’ ambitions. Of course, more recently, linked to the terrible Russian war against Ukraine, policymakers are also looking to limit exposure to fossil fuel imports and the risks they pose.
The current US administration has described hydrogen as a “game-changer” in the fight against climate change and the transition away from fossil fuels. The UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson believes it “has perhaps the greatest potential of all”, while Ireland’s Tánaiste (the deputy head of government) has called it “the holy grail” of energy policy.
Such proclamations are impacting the politics of energy. The European Commission is proposing to allow gas infrastructure owners to fund hydrogen-readiness work, and potentially using the energy bills of electricity consumers to pay for it. A new Energy Bill currently making its way through the UK Parliament could allow a ‘hydrogen levy’ on electricity sales. In normal times, such ‘cross-subsidisation’ would never be allowed. But the climate and energy price crises, mean we are no longer in normal times. The perceived need for speed means that rapid action is considered more important than due process.
And while climate change demands an emergency response, there is a risk that going too fast, without evidence-backed decisions, will actually undermine efforts to decarbonise.
"Modest role"
To reach net zero, practically all fossil-fuel combustion needs to be replaced.
For buildings, heat pumps are a clear winning technology, extracting the majority of their heat output from outside air, ground or water. Even in cold temperatures, heat pumps can be powered using increasingly cost-effective, renewable electricity.
. Richard Lowes. Photo: Richard Lowes, RAP
According to the most detailed and up-to-date global net-zero analyses from international management consultancy McKinsey and The International Energy Agency, heat pumps take up the lion’s share of building heating in their global net-zero predictions. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) recent report explains that “scenarios assessed show a very modest role for hydrogen in buildings by 2050”. The IPCC also highlighted the importance of heat pumps.
The proponents of unchecked hydrogen use are on the wrong side of the evidence, and history. They ended up there because of money — or more specifically, sunk assets, which are now under threat as the world attempts to move away from fossil fuels and its associated infrastructure. The use of hydrogen made from natural gas with carbon capture and storage (CCS) could keep gas flowing through infrastructure that would otherwise be stranded, and maintain the need for oil and gas development and processing facilities through which hydrogen can be produced.
With gas currently providing the largest share of the world’s heating, as well as public policies being considered and designed to remove fossil fuel heating from buildings, it should come as no surprise that the gas industry has been overselling the idea of converting gas infrastructure to run on hydrogen.
Hydrogen is being promoted through a powerful international, political and media machine, associated with the incumbent fossil fuel industry, and it is lobbying governments around the world.
We have seen this lobbying first hand. And while research into and evidence of lobbying tends to be limited, there are plenty of publicly available examples, indicating the scale of the efforts. In a letter to the European Commissions, trade body Eurogas has said hydrogen “will play a key role” in the energy demand for the sectors of home-heating, transport and electricity generation.
Just because you can do something, it doesn’t mean you should
In a rare intervention on political lobbying, an often taboo subject in the UK, The Times newspaper explained how both BP and Shell were lobbying the UK government to support hydrogen to be used for heating. The UK’s ‘All Party Parliamentary Group on Hydrogen’ , “a cross-party group of MPs and peers [member of the UK parliament's upper house] that focuses on raising awareness of, and building support for large scale hydrogen projects” is funded directly by an industry group including Shell, Equinor, Cadent, Northern Gas Networks, SGN, Baxi, etc. These companies are all incumbents in the gas industry.
In the US, gas monopolies are promoting the conversion of their infrastructure to hydrogen and blending hydrogen into gas mix, while fighting government policies to reduce gas use alongside general efforts to undermine building electrification.
. David Cebon, professor of mechanical engineering, University of Cambridge. Photo: David Cebon, University of Cambridge
The scale of this lobbying is vast and has been mapped in detail across Europe where it has been described as “intense and concerted”. The lobby has seen some success in Europe, accused of hijacking European Covid recovery funds.
There are two potential impacts of such lobbying.
Firstly, there could be direct impacts on policy, with governments offering financial and regulatory support for investments in hydrogen, in spite of evidence suggesting this may be a poor use of funds. Indeed we are already seeing this.
But the second, more egregious outcome, would be that such efforts to promote hydrogen delay actual progress on climate change as policymakers are distracted from clearly better and cheaper options. Indeed, it has already been suggested that the oil sector knows the hydrogen solution for personal vehicles is flawed.
Pumping up the pressure
On the face of it, for countries such as the UK and the Netherlands, with well-developed and highly interconnected gas systems, it makes sense to consider the existing system and ask whether it be used in a zero-carbon world. The simplicity of ‘greening the gas’ or the idea of a ‘drop-in replacement’ is also an extremely effective lobbying and sales line.
The parent company of the UK’s largest gas (and oil) boiler manufacturer, explained in its submission to a UK parliamentary inquiry into heating:
"Bosch believes that hydrogen gas, with a by-product simply of water, could be the closest silver bullet we have."
In the same inquiry, one UK gas network owner explained that “a hydrogen-ready boiler solution supplied by a repurposed gas network – which is already built to meet peak heat demand in winter – offers the optimum route to decarbonise heat at the scale required with the lowest levels of disruption and most value for customers”.
In some respects, hydrogen does have some extremely valuable characteristics for clean energy systems. Firstly, it can be stored indefinitely (although the very small molecules make it prone to leaking out of most containers), which in a world of variable renewable energy is potentially attractive for long-term or transportable storage. Secondly, like fossil gas, it can be burned to produce heat or electricity; or used in fuel cells (producing heat and electricity at once). It can also be produced through the electrolysis of water, powered by increasingly cheap renewable electricity.
Yet just because you can do something, it doesn’t mean you should. And this is patently true for the idea of widespread hydrogen use. In the same way that champagne is reserved for special occasions, hydrogen is a premium product with specific value.
Even a cursory look at the basic technical details show hydrogen as a very expensive and environmentally unattractive solution for the heating and much of the transport sector.
Not a source of energy
A common misunderstanding is that hydrogen is itself a source of energy. It is not. It is solely a vector or energy carrier: a means of storing and transporting energy. Hydrogen gas does not exist in a state where it can be extracted from the environment in useful quantities, but it must be created, which is energy intensive and costly.
The reason why the fossil-fuel production industry is so keen on hydrogen is because nearly all hydrogen currently made globally (most of which is used in industry) is produced from fossil fuels, mostly gas, but some oil and coal.
Enter 'blue hydrogen', a term that refers to hydrogen produced from fossil gas with (some) greenhouse gas emissions captured in the production process and in theory stored so that they have no impact on the climate.
Blue hydrogen is controversial principally because of worries that it might be worse for the climate than simply burning methane. These concerns stem from the fact that the production of the gas used to make it could lead to increased fugitive methane emissions, a very potent greenhouse gas, and also because capturing and storing CO2 emissions is difficult, expensive and has not been successfully achieved at scale anywhere in the world.
A belief that the whole idea of hydrogen had been captured by the fossil-fuel industry led to Chris Jackson resigning as chairman of the UK’s Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association, saying the group’s support for blue H2 “is at best an expensive distraction, and at worst a lock-in for continued fossil-fuel use that guarantees we will fail to meet our decarbonisation goals”.
With fossil gas prices skyrocketing to record highs, and the entire European continent aiming to rapidly reduce its exposure to Russian gas imports, blue hydrogen has rapidly gone out of fashion. Although you won’t hear that mentioned by many industrial hydrogen proponents.
Much of the hydrogen push has silently pivoted towards 'green' hydrogen, created from water using green electricity. While on the face of it, a move from fossil fuel-derived hydrogen to renewably produced hydrogen might appear to be a good thing, the reality is that burning green hydrogen at scale seems even less plausible than burning blue hydrogen. The energy content of green hydrogen comes from electricity and the production process involves significant energy efficiency losses.
The electricity could be used directly in 100% efficient electric heaters or even more efficient heat pumps which use electricity to extract heat from the environment. Heat pumps operate with an effective efficiency of over 300%, with each unit of electricity going in, resulting in three units of useful heat.
These conversion efficiencies are a basic element of energy economics, and are the nub of the green hydrogen debate.
Energy conversion basics
All energy conversion processes result in losses, meaning you get less useful energy out compared to the amount you put in. For example, a power station burning gas may be around 60% efficient with 40% of the energy lost as heat.
Fundamentally, the hydrogen pathway for heating (all the way from electricity generation to burning it in a boiler) has much greater energy losses than direct electric route. It therefore requires far more primary energy (about 6 times more) than using a heat pump to deliver the same amount of heat, leading to much higher costs.
The biggest energy loss associated with green hydrogen use is in the process of electrolysis, or splitting water molecules to produce the hydrogen in the first place.
A recent academic review put in-practice efficiencies at between 60% and 73% for electrolysis (i.e. one unit in and 0.6 to 0.73 units out), albeit with some scope for improvement; something the hydrogen industry (obviously) agrees with.
Blue hydrogen was, at least before the gas price explosion, potentially cost effective compared to widespread use of heat pumps in various independent pieces of analysis, albeit under less stretching greenhouse gas reduction targets.
There is, however, not one independent study that suggests green hydrogen is cost effective compared to the widespread use of heat pumps. The high cost of hydrogen compared to alternatives becomes quite obvious once you understand how the energy efficiency of green hydrogen and compares to electrification.
. Relative efficiencies of heat pumps, direct electrification and hydrogen heating. Photo: David Cebon
The graphic above spells this out. The first route (shown on the left) shows transmission of the electricity to a consumer where it powers a heat pump. As heat pumps use electricity to heat a building from the environment that results in around three (or more) units of heat for every unit of electricity consumed, they have an effective 300% efficiency (known as the “coefficient of performance” or COP, which is in this case three). While some losses occur in the transportation of electricity, the overall effect is that 100 units of electricity results in about 270 units of heat reaching the consumer. This is an amazing energy uplift when you consider the value of clean electricity and that over two thirds of the useful heat is coming from an inexhaustible renewable source.
The second route (centre) uses a simple electric space heater, powered by green electricity. There are small losses in electricity transportation, but most of the 90 kWh of electricity reaching the heater is converted into useful heat, yielding about 86 kWh.
The third route on the right shows the generation of green hydrogen which is burnt in a boiler for heating. Significant losses occur in the conversion of electricity to hydrogen. But further losses occur as energy is used to store the hydrogen and transport it to buildings and also when the hydrogen is burnt in boilers. 100 units in at the start of the process leads to 46 out in this pathway. Comparing the left hand and right hand routes, the heat pump route delivers about six times more heat than a green hydrogen boiler for the same amount of electricity generation.
This six times difference is the stark reality of using hydrogen for heating compared to heat pumps.
If providing the equivalent amount of heat by the green hydrogen route requires up to six times as much primary energy, it would be necessary to build up to six times as many offshore wind turbines or nuclear power stations, all with their own environmental and resource impacts. Clearly this electricity capacity would take much longer to build, cost more and would delay decarbonisation. Hence comments from the UK’s Climate Change Committee CEO warning that switching all heating to hydrogen would be “impractical”, particularly when climate change demands rapid and immediate action.
Perhaps it is not quite that simple
Now, you might be thinking, OK that’s great in theory, but you don’t always have renewable electricity being generated when you need your heat pump running and so you will not be able to get that efficiency all of the time.
This is certainly true for some of the time. However, as pointed out by the late Sir David Mackay – the British physicist, mathematician, Regius Professor of Engineering and Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change – even running a heat pump solely on electricity generated by gas power stations would still use less gas and therefore have lower emissions than using a gas boiler. That’s because, even though your gas power station may be only 50% efficient, your heat pump is 300% efficient and that makes the overall process more efficient than burning gas in a boiler.
Politicians do not want to take the difficult decisions
It’s also important to bear in mind that heat pumps perform less well when it is colder with a performance of possibly 150% (a coefficient of performance of 1.5). But even in that case, the heat pump would still generate three times more heat per unit of electricity than green hydrogen. Using a heat pump will therefore always be more efficient and require less primary energy than burning green hydrogen for the same amount of heat.
The impracticality of hydrogen is not just limited to expanding the electricity sector to infeasible levels. The UK gas grid is currently not suitable for transporting hydrogen and an investment of £22 bn ($26bn) would be needed to make it so according to analysis for the UK government; that’s similar to the total current value of the UK gas grid. There is also no getting away from the fact that hydrogen would require geographically based conversions, turning off whole areas of gas at a time and then refilling and reconnecting them, potentially leaving whole areas without heat or hot water for days.
Need for speed
Clearly the climate is changing and atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations continue to increase. Slow progress thus far means that the world needs to decarbonise as quickly as possible. Any delay to decarbonising heating or transport, such large chunks of current emissions, could be disastrous. We obviously also need to wean ourselves off increasingly expensive fossil fuels.
Taking the hydrogen-for-heating route would not just cost much more but would take longer to achieve, requiring so much more primary energy. This idea is unlikely to ever get beyond limited trials.
A more likely scenario is that more time is wasted considering the idea of burning hydrogen for heat and more is spent funding companies to research it because politicians do not want to take the required difficult decisions. The lobbying will continue and while governments are slowly beginning to understand the limits and costs of hydrogen, lobbying is moving towards local authority policymakers where future decisions will need to be made.
Amidst the hype, citizens are become increasingly confused about future heating technologies. All of this leads to climate delay and continued exposure to fossil fuels.
But when decision-makers are faced with the real-world cost implications of hydrogen for heat, the role of electrification and energy efficiency will eventually be realised. Yet this may be too late.
Decarbonising heat will be hard enough. And when speed is everything, there is no time for the hydrogen distraction.
·David Cebon is professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Cambridge, and an executive at the Centre for Sustainable Road Freight
·Dr Richard Lowes is a senior associate at the Regulatory Assistance Project and research fellow in the University of Exeter's Energy Policy Group
Extracting water from desert air: unique 10GW green hydrogen project set to begin construction in 2022
Extracting water from desert air: unique 10GW green hydrogen project set to begin construction in 2022
The $10.75bn Desert Bloom facility in Australia’s Northern Territory is due to start commercial production the following year
Source: Recharge News | By Leigh Collins
The 10GW Desert Bloom green hydrogen project in the Australian outback — which will source water for the electrolysis process from the air — has been granted Major Project Status by the Northern Territory.
This means that the regional government will work with developer Aqua Aerem to progress the $10.75bn project to full scale, including identifying suitable locations in the sparsely populated Barkly region and fast-tracking each stage through the planning approvals process.
Aqua Aerem said the status will allow construction to begin on an initial 8MW test next year, ahead of a 400MW first phase, with “the production of commercial quantities of green hydrogen from 2023”. Upon completion in 2027, the project will produce about 410,000 tonnes of green H2 for less than $2/kg, making it cost-competitive with grey hydrogen made from unabated fossil fuels.
Desert Bloom is unique among an ever-growing global pipeline of gigawatt-scale green hydrogen projects because it will capture its water from the air. Electrolysers, which split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen generally need nine litres of H2O for every kilogram of H2 — yet most giga-scale projects are situated in arid or semi-arid regions where high solar irradiation improves the levelised cost of H2 production.
“Our air-to-water technology, which solves this previously intractable water supply problem, is a world first; invented and developed here in Australia,” said Gerard Reiter, chief executive of Aqua Aerem, which means “water air” in Latin.
“This technology will open the door for green hydrogen projects to be located where the best renewable power sources are available, which is generally in the driest areas of the planet.”
Aqua Aerem offers little detail about how the technology works, only to say that it utilises an absorber that will “capture water from the atmosphere in arid environments... with increased efficiency in hotter climates”.
Most of the existing global pipeline of green H2 projects are expected to source their water from the sea through purpose-built water desalination facilities.
Despite the general lack of the rain in the arid/semi-arid Barkly region of the Northern Territory, the humidity levels — ie, the water vapour content in the air — still average 23% in the driest month of October, rising to 45% in January.
When water is extracted from air, it is usually through condensation — drawing air into a machine and cooling it until the water vapour reaches its dew point and turns to liquid.
The Northern Territory’s power utility, Territory Generation, intends to buy hydrogen from the initial stages of the project and use it to generate electricity at a gas-fired power plant in the nearby township of Tennants Creek. This will be an expensive way to produce power, as the round-trip efficiency of converting electricity to hydrogen and back again is usually about 30%, meaning that only 30kWh is produced from the original 100kWh.
In the longer term, the developer aims to utilise existing natural-gas pipelines to transport its H2 900km north to Darwin for export to Asia, although local ammonia production is also being considered.
Desert Bloom will eventually consist of thousands of moveable 2MW containerised modules called Hydrogen Production Units that utilise PV panels, concentrated parabolic solar thermal heaters, the patented air-to-water equipment, and electrolysers — thus generating water, heat, electricity and hydrogen.
Singapore-based Sanguine Impact Investment, Aqua Aerem’s majority shareholder, has already taken a financial investment decision to provide the project with an initial A$1bn ($977m) — and further investment is expected to come from “one of Japan’s largest gas buyers and distributors”, the developer says.
Floating solar power could supply 'almost half' of global electricity demand: NREL
Floating solar power could supply 'almost half' of global electricity demand: NREL
US researchers calculate as much as 10,600TWh in annual power generation potential from water-top PV installed on hydro-dam reservoirs
Source: Recharge News | By Darius Snieckus
Wiring in floating solar arrays to existing hydropower reservoirs around the world could change the face of the global energy system by meeting nearly 50% of total electricity demand, according to a potentially market-making new study out of the US Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).
Researchers estimate as much as 7.6TW of power could be produced by the water-top PV. This works out to about 10,600TWh of potential annual generation – even before output from the hydro plants – compared to worldwide electricity consumption which, according to International Energy Agency 2018 figures cited by NREL, was just over 22,300TWh.
“This is really optimistic,” said NREL integrated decision support group researcher Nathan Lee, who was lead author of the study.
But he tempered: “This does not represent what could be economically feasible or what the markets could actually support. Rather, it is an upper-bound estimate of feasible resources that considers waterbody constraints and generation system performance.”
NREL counted 379,068 freshwater hydropower reservoirs worldwide that could host floating PV arrays, though noted that “additional siting data [would be] needed prior to any implementation because some may be dry during parts of the year”.
Coupling floating solar and hydropower is seen having a strong rationale for a number of reasons, including that a hybrid system could have lower transmission costs by linking two seasonally-aligned power sources to a common substation and that the two technologies can balance each other with their respective electricity production.
“The greatest potential for solar power is during dry seasons, while for hydropower rainy seasons present the best opportunity. Under one scenario, that means operators of a hybrid system could use pumped storage hydropower to store excess solar generation ,” said Lee.
Like its cousin in the floating wind sector, floating PV has been hailed for its huge potential in the next wave of the energy transition, with the ability to capitalize on unused water surfaces to produce renewable power in countries where land may be scarce. Plants in the hundreds of megawatts, or even gigawatt-scale, are now being proposed around the world.
Technical advisory group DNV GL, which earlier this year set up a cross-sector initiative to develop best practice for the sector, has cited estimates that human-made inland waters alone have the potential to support up to 4TW of new power capacity globally.
Floating solar is also pushing out into the open sea – Recharge reported earlier this year how a pioneering deployment offshore of the Netherlands remained operating after being hit by Storm Ciara.
NREL, in a previous study, estimated that installing floating solar panels on man-made US reservoirs could generate about 10% of the nation’s annual electricity production.