Developing blue hydrogen projects is “greenwashing” and “mind-bogglingly stupid”, according to Andrew Forrest, chairman and founder of Fortescue Future Industries (FFI).

FFI is the green energy subsidiary of Australian iron ore miner Fortescue Metals Group, which has earmarked 10pc of net profits to explore green hydrogen projects in Australia, Argentina, Jordan and Papua New Guinea.

FFI’s ambition is to grow its green hydrogen production to 15mn t/yr by 2030 and 50mn t/yr by 2040. It has already signed supply deals with German materials manufacturer Covestro and the German government.

State policies should pursue only green hydrogen if they want to decarbonise effectively, Forrest told the FT Hydrogen Summit.

“It would be great if blue hydrogen worked,” he says. “But succeeding 1 in 20 times is a statistical failure.”

“It would be great if blue hydrogen worked” Forrest, FFI

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has provided a clear imperative to reduce natural gas use around the world, Forrest adds.

“You will not compete against Russia with LNG,” he says. “If you keep buying gas you will keep propping up the Kremlin.”

Forrest notes there are specific issues around the storage of CO₂ from the production of blue hydrogen, citing Chevron’s Gorgon LNG carbon capture and storage (CCS) facility as an example of a project that has not worked.

“I have not met a scientist yet who says it stays down there [in sequestration] leaking at less than 1pc a year—that means it all comes back out in the century you get rid of it,” he says.

Forrest also calls for more policies such as contracts for difference and the US production tax credit to incentivise the deployment of green hydrogen.

Blue versus green

Forrest’s remarks were delivered during a keynote address, but in a subsequent panel some speakers challenged the view that blue hydrogen production should be avoided.

The world is certain to exceed a carbon budget consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement, meaning some carbon has to be removed and stored, according to Myles Allen, professor of geosystems science at the University of Oxford.

“There will be excess CO₂,” he says. “The riskiest place is to put it is into the atmosphere—not the ground.”

Allen notes that, although Gorgon has not met its target to to capture and store at least 80pc of the emissions generated over the first five years of the project, this is not a reason to give up on the technology. Updates from Chevron indicate it has stored closer to around 37.5pc of the emissions from the project.

“That is not failure—that means they have to do better,” he says.

37.5pc – Estimated storage rate of Gorgon LNG CCS facility

Allen’s comments were echoed by Guloren Turan, general manager for advocacy at the Global CCS Institute.

“It is very difficult to get to net zero unless we deploy CCS,” she says. “The evidence is there—CO₂ has been stored for years.”

Turan references a special report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on CCS from 2018 which notes the vast majority of CO₂ will gradually be immobilised by various trapping mechanisms in storage sites.

“Observations from engineered and natural analogues as well as models suggest that the fraction retained in appropriately selected and managed geological reservoirs is very likely to exceed 99pc over 100 years and is likely to exceed 99pc over 1,000 years,” says the report.

---

Author: Tom Young