A cost comparison of various hourly-reliable and net-zero hydrogen production pathways in the United States

Justin M Bracci; Evan D Sherwin; Naomi L Boness; Adam R Brandt

doi:10.1038/s41467-023-43137-x

A cost comparison of various hourly-reliable and net-zero hydrogen production pathways in the United States

Nat Commun. 2023 Nov 15;14(1):7391. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-43137-x.

Authors

Justin M Bracci^{1

2}, Evan D Sherwin^{1

3}, Naomi L Boness⁴, Adam R Brandt⁵

Affiliations

¹ Department of Energy Science & Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
² National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, USA.
³ Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA.
⁴ Precourt Institute for Energy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
⁵ Department of Energy Science & Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. abrandt@stanford.edu.

Abstract

Hydrogen (H₂) as an energy carrier may play a role in various hard-to-abate subsectors, but to maximize emission reductions, supplied hydrogen must be reliable, low-emission, and low-cost. Here, we build a model that enables direct comparison of the cost of producing net-zero, hourly-reliable hydrogen from various pathways. To reach net-zero targets, we assume upstream and residual facility emissions are mitigated using negative emission technologies. For the United States (California, Texas, and New York), model results indicate next-decade hybrid electricity-based solutions are lower cost ($2.02-$2.88/kg) than fossil-based pathways with natural gas leakage greater than 4% ($2.73-$5.94/kg). These results also apply to regions outside of the U.S. with a similar climate and electric grid. However, when omitting the net-zero emission constraint and considering the U.S. regulatory environment, electricity-based production only achieves cost-competitiveness with fossil-based pathways if embodied emissions of electricity inputs are not counted under U.S. Tax Code Section 45V guidance.