

That is all besides the point though in a process where H2 is both produced and consumed, as long as that
I wouldn’t produce 1g silver when I produce 1g gold in the process, I make more money with the gold,. Thats why it isn’t competitive.
It appears it isn’t, even compared to air compression,
efficiency of green hydrogen is low and storage of it is hard, fuel cell efficiency is also low I think it ends up with about a 20% efficiency but don’t quote me on that. Also you’d like to sell it to the industry anyways. But they take it from cheap gray sources right now so whatever.
However there is no technological reason why one would need some carbon source for producing H2. Electrolysis from water is a well established process.
The scales of electrolysis aren’t as big yet (maybe now idk, but 2-3 years ago they weren’t), compared to methane processes. They also don’t produce their own energy, they take energy instead! (Get 2 H2 from CH4 and burn the C to CO2, compared to electrolysis which takes energy)


Here your source. Well you were talking about H2 being the efficient option. There is energy efficiency, volumetric efficiency, life cycle (in the sense of how long does the plant last, wind turbines last for 20-25 years, how sustainable are the resources and are they recyclable), even plant space needed.
As it stands now H2 prices need to go up for it to make green H2 competitive. Idk what you are on about, milk prices are a symptom of farmers wanting enough compensation for their work, that’s why you find milk for different prices depending on the form of agriculture. More land for the cow and organic will mean its more expensive, you can’t make this any more competitive because it isn’t. Grey H2 also produces energy in production and you can’t compete with that, hence the price of H2 needs to go up e.g. via CO2 tax.
Storage storing energy is indeed the point of it, but the question is also how much money do you want to pay for the energy? Did you buy any oil recently?