Are we thinking about the emission of greenhouse gasses such as methane and carbon when we do day to day activities like: driving a car, using energy to cook or heating our houses? Probably not. But by doing this we are making our small but constant contribution to the problem of Global Warming. We see from worsening weather disasters around the world that this returns as a boomerang back to our houses and families.
of all natural disasters were related to climate change
USA share of global world cumulative CO₂ emission
people can be pushed into poverty by 2030 because of climate change impact
Statistics Source: https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-states?country=~USA
Statistics Source: Executive Summary - Climate Science Special Report
The overall trend in global average temperature indicates that warming is occurring in an increasing number of regions. Future Earth warming depends on our greenhouse gas emissions in the coming decades.
At present, approximately 11 billion metric tons of carbon are released into the atmosphere each year. As a result, the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is on the rise every year, as it surpasses the natural capacity for removal.
warmest years on historical record have occurred since 2010
is the total increase in the Earth's temperature since 1880
warming rate since 1981
Observations from both satellites and the Earth’s surface are indisputable — the planet has warmed rapidly over the past 44 years. As far back as 1850, data from weather stations all over the globe make clear the Earth’s average temperature has been rising.
In recent days, as the Earth has reached its highest average temperatures in recorded history, warmer than any time in the last 125,000 years. Paleoclimatologists, who study the Earth’s climate history, are confident that the current decade is warmer than any period since before the last ice age, about 125,000 years ago.
Clean hydrogen has 3 main uses: energy storage, load balancing, and as feedstock/fuel. Used in all sectors, including steel, chemical, oil refining & heavy transport. Actions to accelerate decarbonization & increase clean hydrogen use include:
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and achieving carbon neutrality requires widespread renewable energy and a huge increase in vehicles, products, and processes powered by electricity.
Electricity generated from increasingly renewable energy sources is the right way to create a clean energy system. Switching from direct use of fossil fuels to electricity improves air quality by reducing emissions of local pollutants.In order to increase the use of electricity, we can do the following:
As the foremost element in the periodic table, hydrogen holds a unique position in the universe, given its status as the lightest and one of the most ancient and abundant chemical elements.
Hydrogen, in its pure form, needs to be extracted since it is usually present in more intricate molecules, such as water or hydrocarbons, on Earth.
Hydrogen powers stars through nuclear fusion. This creates energy and all the other chemicals elements which are found on Earth.

Hydrogen is an essential part for manufacturing Ammoniam Nitrate fertilizers. Half of the world's food is grown using hydrogen-based ammonia fertilizer.
Hydrogen is used in the production of methanol, where hydrogen is reacted with carbon monoxide to produce chemical feedstocks.
Hydrogen fuel cells make electricity from combining hydrogen and oxygen. Power plants are showing increased interest in using hydrogen, and gas turbines can convert from natural gas to hydrogen combustion.

Hydrogen is an alternative vehicle fuel. It allows us to power fuel cells in zero-emission electric drive vehicles.
Hydrogen heat is used in order to reduce emissions in the manufacturing process.
Steelmaking is an industry that is beginning to successfully use hydrogen in two ways to eliminate almost all greenhouse emissions from the steelmaking process. First for Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) replacing coke (from coal) with hydrogen to remove oxygen from iron ore. Second for heat to melt the iron ore into DRI and then into low carbon steel.
Liquid hydrogen has been used by NASA as a rocket fuel since the 1950s.
Hydrogen is used in production of explosives, fertilizers, and other chemicals; to convert heavier hydrocarbons to lightweight hydrocarbons to produce many value-added chemicals; to hydrogenate organic compounds; and to remove impurities like sulfur, halides, oxygen, metals, and/or nitrogen. It's also in household cleaners like ammonium hydroxide.

Hydrogen is used to make vitamins and other pharmaceutical products.
In the production of float glass, hydrogen is needed to provide heat and to prevent the large tin bath from oxidizing.
It is used to hydrogenate unsaturated fatty acids in animal and vegetable oils, to obtain solid fats for margarine and other food products.
Using clean hydrogen makes it possible to reduce emissions while "cracking" heavier petroleum into lightweight hydrocarbons to produce many value-added chemicals.
By 2030
Statistics Source: IEA Global Hydrogen Review 2022
SMR is a way of producing syngas (Hydrogen and Carbon monoxide) by mixing hydrocarbons (like natural gas) with water. This mixture goes into a special container called a reformer vessel where a high-pressure mixture of steam and methane comes into contact with a nickel catalyst. As a result of the reaction, hydrogen and carbon monoxide are produced.
To make more hydrogen, carbon monoxide from the first reaction is mixed with water through the WGS reaction. As a result, we receive more hydrogen and a gas called carbon dioxide. For each unit of hydrogen produced there are 6 units of carbon dioxide produced and in almost all cases released into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is a harmful gas causing climate change.
$863 ($0.86 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity = $474 + Methane $383 + Water $6 US EIA May 2024*)
The SMR method involves combining natural gas with high-temperature steam and a catalyst to generate a blend of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Then, more water is added to the mixture to make more hydrogen and a gas called carbon dioxide.
For each unit of hydrogen produced there are 6 units of carbon dioxide produced. In a few experimental trials, to help the environment, the carbon dioxide is captured and stored underground using a special technology called CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage). This leaves almost pure hydrogen.
One of the main problems with carbon capture and storage is that without careful management of storage, the CO2 can flow from these underground reservoirs into the surrounding air and contribute to climate change, or spoil the nearby water supply. Another is the risk of creating earthquake tremors caused by the storage increasing underground pressure, known as human caused seismicity.
$1,253 ($1.25 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity $474 + Methane $505 + Water $4 US + CCS $270 EIA May 2024*)
This technology based on natural gas emits no greenhouse gases as it does not produce CO2. Methane Pyrolysis refers to a method of generating hydrogen by breaking down methane into its basic components, namely hydrogen and solid carbon.
Oxygen is not involved at all within this process (no CO or CO2 is produced). Thus, for the production of hydrogen gas there is no need for an additional of CO or for CO2 separation.
$1,199 ($1.20 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity $433 +Methane $766 EIA May 2024*)
The concept of Green Hydrogen involves generating hydrogen from renewable energy sources by means of electrolysis, a process that splits water into its fundamental constituents, hydrogen and oxygen, using an electric current. This process can be powered by a range of renewable energy sources, such as solar energy, wind power, and hydropower.
The electricity used in the electrolysis process is derived exclusively from renewable sources, ensuring a sustainable and environmentally-friendly production of hydrogen. It generates zero carbon dioxide emissions and, as a result, prevents global warming.
$3,289 ($3.29 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity $3,278 + water $11 US EIA May 2024*)
Known as "White" hydrogen, it can be generated through various geological processes. The study of geologic hydrogen and its potential as an energy resource is an active area of research, as it holds promise for renewable energy applications, particularly in the context of hydrogen fuel cells and clean energy production.
It's important to note that the creation of geologic hydrogen is generally a slow and long-term process, occurring over geological timescales. This is because the other methods are human production technology methods and this is creation by a natural phenomena. The availability and abundance of geologic hydrogen can vary significantly depending on the specific geological setting and the interplay of various factors such as rock composition, temperature, pressure, and the presence of suitable reactants.
Serpentinization is a chemical reaction that occurs when water interacts with certain types of rocks, particularly ultramafic rocks rich in minerals such as olivine and pyroxene. This process results in the formation of serpentine minerals and produces hydrogen gas as a byproduct. Serpentinization typically takes place in environments such as hydrothermal systems, oceanic crust, and certain tectonic settings.
In regions with high concentrations of radioactive elements, such as uranium and thorium, the decay of these elements releases radiation. This radiation can interact with surrounding water or other fluids, splitting the water molecules and generating hydrogen gas through a process called radiolysis. This mechanism is believed to contribute to the production of hydrogen in certain deep geological settings, such as deep groundwater systems and radioactive mineral deposits.
Geothermal systems, which involve the circulation of hot water or steam through fractured rocks, can generate hydrogen gas as a result of various processes. High-temperature hydrothermal systems can cause the thermal decomposition of hydrocarbons, releasing hydrogen gas. Additionally, the interaction between water and hot rocks in geothermal reservoirs can lead to the production of hydrogen through serpentinization or other geochemical reactions.
Abiotic methane refers to methane gas that is not directly derived from biological sources, such as microbial activity. In certain geological environments, abiotic methane can be generated through processes like thermal decomposition of organic matter or reactions between carbon dioxide and hydrogen. This methane can subsequently undergo thermal or catalytic cracking, producing hydrogen gas.
Keep current hydrogen production methods BUT
make additional steps to broaden them with cleaner production methods
And as a result the world will get more vital hydrogen and become one step closer to net zero emission
The market is dominated by grey hydrogen produced from natural gas through a fossil fuel-powered SMR process. Every year, the production of grey hydrogen amounts to approximately 70 to 80 million tons, and it is primarily used in industrial chemistry. More than 80% is used for the synthesis of ammonia and its derivatives (fertilizer for agriculture, 50 perecent of food worldwide) or for oil refining operations. Unfortunately, for every 1 kg of grey hydrogen, almost 6-8 kg of carbon dioxide is emitted into the atmosphere.
More than 95% of the world's hydrogen production is based on fossil fuels with greenhouse gas emissions. Nevertheless, to achieve a more stable future and promote the transition of pure energy, the global goal is to reduce the use of other “colors” of hydrogen and focus on the production of a clean product, such as green or turquoise hydrogen. Reaching the zero carbon footprint will require a gradual transition from grey to green/turquoise hydrogen in the coming years.
It is possible to produce decarbonized hydrogen. An option is to use another feedstock, namely water, and convert it in large electrolyzers into H2 and oxygen (O2), which are returned to the atmosphere. If the electricity used to power the electrolyzers is 100% renewable energy (photovoltaic panels, wind turbines, etc.), then hydrogen becomes green. Currently, it is about 0.1% of the total production of hydrogen, but it is expected that it will increase since the cost of renewable energy continues to fall.
U.S. additions to electric generation capacity from 2000 to 2025. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports that the United States
is building power plants at a record pace. As indicated on the chart, nearly all new electric generating capacity either already installed or planned
for 2025 is from clean energy sources, while new power plants coming
on line 25 years ago, in 2000, were predominantly fueled by natural gas. New wind power plants began to come on line in 2001 and new solar plants, 10 years, later in 2011. Since 2023, the U.S. power industry has built more solar than any other type of power plant. The EIA predicts that clean energy (wind, solar, and battery storage) will deliver 93% of new power-plant capacity in 2025.
Global surface air temperature departures between 1940 and 2024 from the average temperature for the period 1991-2020 (averages below the 11-year average are blue and those above are red). The average in October 2024 was +0.80 degrees Celsius above the reference period average, down from +0.85 degrees Celsius above the reference period average in 2023, which was the warmest October on record.
New Haven, Connecticut, has broken ground on an ambitious geothermal energy network that will provide low-emission heating and cooling to the city’s bustling, historic Union Station and a new public housing complex across the street.
The project will play a crucial role in the city’s attempt to decarbonize all municipal buildings and transportation by the end of 2030. As one of Connecticut’s first geothermal energy networks, it will also serve as a case study of how well the technology can both lower energy costs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions as the state considers promoting wider adoption of these systems.
“At the end of the day, you’re going to have the most efficient heating and cooling system available for our historic train station as well as roughly 1,000 units of housing,” said Steven Winter, New Haven’s executive director of climate and sustainability. “Anything we can help do to improve health outcomes and reduce climate change–causing emissions is really valuable.”
In climate-conscious states across the country, thermal energy networks are emerging as a promising way to reduce reliance on fossil fuels for heating, lower utility bills, and create a pathway for the gas industry to transition its business model for a cleaner-energy future. These neighborhood-scale systems use ground-source heat pumps and a web of underground pipes to deliver heating and cooling to connected buildings.
The thermal energy for heating can come from a variety of sources, including geothermal systems, industrial waste heat, and surface water. Because no fossil fuels are directly burned to produce heat, the only emissions are those created generating the electricity to run the network. At the same time, the systems insulate customers from volatile and rising natural gas prices.
“There’s a lot of excitement around networked geothermal because it actually offers solutions to a lot of problems,” said Samantha Dynowski, state director of Sierra Club’s Connecticut chapter. “It can be a more equitable solution for a whole neighborhood, a whole community — not just a single home.”
The practice of deploying such systems as a neighborhood loop is relatively new, but the component parts are well established: Geothermal heat pumps have been around for more than 100 years, and the pipe networks are very similar to those used for natural gas delivery.
“The backbone technology is the same kind of pipe you use in the gas system,” said Jessica Silber-Byrne, thermal energy networks research and communications manager for the nonprofit Building Decarbonization Coalition. “They’re not experimental. This isn’t an immature technology that still needs to be proved out.”
There are a handful of networked geothermal systems around the United States, owned by municipalities, private organizations, and universities. A couple of miles away from the Union Station project, at Yale University, development is underway on a geothermal loop serving several science buildings.
But the idea is catching on among gas utilities, too. The nation’s first utility-owned geothermal network came online in Framingham, Massachusetts, in June 2024, and just received an $8.6 million federal grant that will allow it to double in size. Across the country, 26 utility thermal energy network pilots are underway, and 13 states have passed some form of legislation exploring or supporting the approach, according to the Building Decarbonization Coalition.
In Connecticut, a comprehensive energy bill that passed earlier this year established a grant and loan program to support the development of thermal energy networks. Advocates are now pushing Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat, to issue the bonds needed to fund the new initiative.
The New Haven network could provide a concrete example of the opportunities offered by such systems.
The plan began when the federal government was seeking applications for its Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program, an initiative created by President Joe Biden’s 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. Union Station seemed like an excellent property to retrofit because of its age, its size, and its prominent role in the city: Nearly a million travelers pass through the station each year, making it one of Amtrak’s busiest stops and an excellent platform for demonstrating the potential of geothermal networks.
“We thought it would be a powerful message to send for this beautiful landmark building that’s also the gateway to the city,” Winter said.
In July 2024, the federal program awarded the proposal just under $9.5 million; though there were questions earlier in the year about whether the Trump administration would attempt to block the money, the grant program ultimately proceeded. Planners expect federal tax credits and state incentives to cover the remaining $7 million in the project budget.
The network will use as many as 200 geothermal boreholes. Fluid will circulate through pipes in each of these wells, picking up thermal energy stored within the earth; in hotter weather, when cooling is needed, the systems will transfer energy back into the ground.
The city began drilling the first test boreholes in November. The results were promising: One test hole was able to extend down 1,200 feet, significantly farther than the 850 feet projected, Winter said. If more boreholes can be drilled that deep, it could mean fewer holes are needed overall — and thus less materials — making the project more efficient, he said.
Construction of the network is still in the early stages. The test boreholes should be completed this month, and the design of the ground heat exchanger — the underground portion of the system in which the thermal energy is transferred — is about halfway done, Winter said. The city is also preparing to accept proposals for the retrofit of the heating and cooling systems in the station itself.
The goal is to have the system up and running in the latter half of 2028. The apartment units, which are still in the design phase, will be connected to the system as they are built.
Even as the initial plan comes together, New Haven is already considering the possibility of expanding the nascent network to include more buildings, such as other apartment units under development nearby, existing buildings in the neighborhood, and a police station around the corner, Winter said.
“Ideally, we end up with a municipally owned thermal utility that can help decarbonize this corner of the city and provide affordable, clean heating and cooling,” he said.
Since spring of last year, North Carolina’s largest utility has been testing whether household batteries can help the electric grid in times of need — and now the company wants to roll out the plan to businesses, local governments, and nonprofits, too.
Duke Energy has already paid hundreds of North Carolinians to let it tap power from their home storage systems when electricity demand is highest. It’s Duke’s first foray into running a “virtual power plant,” in which the company manages electricity produced and stored by consumers, much as it would control generation from its own facilities.
In September, the utility proposed a similar model for its nonresidential customers, asserting that the scheme will save money by shrinking the need for new power plants and expensive upgrades to the grid. The recognition signals a way forward for distributed renewable energy and storage as state and national politicians back away from the clean energy transition.
The initiative now needs approval from the five-member North Carolina Utilities Commission, where the virtual-power-plant model has faced some skepticism. But the apparent merits of Duke’s plan, which has broad backing, may be too enticing for commissioners to ignore — especially when the state is grappling with rising rates and voracious demand from data centers and other heavy electricity users.
“In an era of massive load growth, something that should lower costs to customers while helping meet peak demand — to me, it’s an absolute no-brainer,” said Ethan Blumenthal, regulatory counsel for the North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association, an advocacy group. “I’m hopeful that [regulators] see it the same way.”
Duke’s trial residential battery incentives grew out of a compromise with rooftop solar installers. Like many investor-owned utilities around the country, the company sought to lower bill credits for the electrons that solar owners add to the grid. When the solar industry and clean energy advocates fought back, the scheme dubbed PowerPair was born.
The test program provides rebates of up to $9,000 for a battery paired with rooftop photovoltaic panels. It’s capped at roughly 6,000 participants, or however many it takes to reach a limit of 60 megawatts of solar. Half of the households agree to let Duke access their batteries 30 to 36 times each year, earning an extra $37 per month on average; the other half enroll in electric rates that discourage use when demand peaks.
The incentives have been crucial for rooftop solar installers, who’ve faced a torrent of policy and macroeconomic headwinds this year, and they’ve proved vital for customers who couldn’t otherwise afford the up-front costs of installing cheap, clean energy.
But the PowerPair enrollees already make up 30 megawatts in one of Duke’s two North Carolina utility territories and could hit their limit in the central part of the state early next year, leaving both consumers and the rooftop solar industry anxious about what’s next.
Duke’s latest proposal for nonresidential customers — which, unlike the PowerPair test, would be permanent — is one answer.
The proposed program is similar to PowerPair in that it’s born of compromise: Last summer, the state-sanctioned customer advocate, clean energy companies, and others agreed to drop their objections to Duke’s carbon-reduction plan under several conditions, including that the utility develop incentives for battery storage for commercial and industrial customers. The Utilities Commission later blessed the deal.
“This was pursuant to the settlement in last year’s carbon plan,” said Blumenthal, “so it’s been a long time coming.”
While many industry and nonprofit insiders refer to the scheme as “Commercial PowerPair,” its official title is the Non-Residential Storage Demand Response Program.
That name reflects the incentives’ focus on storage, with solar as only a minor factor: Duke wants to offer businesses, local governments, and nonprofits $120 per kilowatt of battery capacity installed on its own and just $30 more if it’s paired with photovoltaics.
The maximum up-front inducement of $150 per storage kilowatt is much less than the $360 per kilowatt offered under PowerPair. But more significant for nonresidential customers could be monthly bill credits: about $250 for a 100-kilowatt battery that could be tapped 36 times a year, plus extra if the battery is actually discharged.
Unlike households participating in PowerPair, which must install solar and storage at the same time to get rebates, nonresidential customers can also get the incentives for adding a battery to pair with existing solar arrays.
“That could be very important for municipalities around North Carolina that have already installed a very significant amount of solar, but very little of that is paired with battery storage,” said Blumenthal.
Duke has high hopes for the program, projecting some 500 customers to enroll. Five years in, the resulting 26 megawatts of battery storage would help it avoid building nearly 28 megawatts of new power plants to meet peak demand, saving over $13.6 million. That’s significantly more than the cost of providing and administering the incentives, which Duke places at nearly $11.8 million.
“The Program provides a source of cost-effective capacity that the Company’s system operators can use at their discretion in situations to deliver economic benefits for all customers,” Duke said in its September filing to regulators. “Importantly, the Company received positive feedback from its customers … when sharing the details of the Program.”
Indeed, the proposal has been met with support not just from the Sustainable Energy Association and other clean energy groups but also organizations like the North Carolina Justice Center, which advocates for low-income households. It earned praise from local governments represented by the Southeast Sustainability Directors Network and conditional support from the state-sanctioned customer advocate, known as Public Staff, too.
The good vibes continued last week, when Duke responded positively to detailed suggestions from these parties on how to improve the program. That included a request from Public Staff that the company raise the per-customer limit on battery capacity to align with the maximum amount of solar that a business or other nonresidential consumer can connect to the grid, which is currently 5 megawatts.
“Larger batteries sited at larger customer sites can help provide more significant system benefits and can reduce the need for incremental utility-owned energy storage installed at all ratepayers’ expense,” the agency told regulators in its November comments. It recommends a cap tied to a customer’s peak demand; for example, a business that consumes more energy at once should get incentives for a bigger battery. Duke agreed in its Dec. 5 comments, calling that limit “reasonable.”
Still, questions remain about how to make the incentives most impactful.
Public Staff, for instance, believes Duke should increase its monthly payment to customers for keeping their batteries charged and ready to deploy. This “capacity credit” is now set at $3.50 per kilowatt but effectively reduced to $2.48, because the utility assumes that a percentage of users won’t properly maintain their systems, based on its experience with households. The company calls that a “capability factor,” but the agency dubs it “collective punishment” for all customers and says it should be eliminated or recalibrated for “more sophisticated” nonresidential participants.
Raleigh, North Carolina–based 8MSolar, a member of the Sustainable Energy Association, is among the many installers that have been eagerly anticipating Duke’s proposal.
The program on its own likely won’t “move the needle unless the incentives get bumped up,” said Bryce Bruncati, the company’s director of sales. However, the scheme could tip the scales for large customers when stacked on top of two federal tax opportunities: a 30% incentive available through the end of 2027 and a deduction tied to the depreciation value of the system — up to 100% thanks to the Republican budget law passed this summer.
“The combined three could really have a big impact for small- to medium-sized commercial projects,” Bruncati said. The Duke program would represent “a little bit of icing on the cake.”
Whatever their size and design, the fate of the incentives rests entirely with the Utilities Commission, now that the final round of comments from Duke and other stakeholders is in. There’s no timeline for a decision.
At least one commissioner, Tommy Tucker, has voiced skepticism about leveraging customer-owned equipment to serve the grid at large. “I’m not a big fan of the [demand-side management] or virtual power plants because you’re dependent upon somebody else,” the former Republican state senator said at a recent hearing, albeit one not connected to the Duke program.
Still, Blumenthal waxes optimistic. After all, Tucker and three other current members of the commission are among those who ruled last year that Duke should present the new incentive program.
“They seem to recognize there is value to distributed batteries being added to the grid,” Blumenthal said. “The fact that [the proposal] is cost-effective is key because the idea is, the more of it you do, the more savings there are.”
Two corrections were made on Dec. 10, 2025: This story originally misstated the number of times a year that Duke can tap a PowerPair participant’s battery; it is 30 to 36 times a year, not 18. The story also originally misstated the enrollment Duke expects for the nonresidential program; the utility expects 26 megawatts of batteries, not 26,000 customer participants.
See more from Canary Media’s “Chart of the week” column.
If you had to guess which country gets the largest share of its electricity from solar, you might understandably toss out the name of a balmy island nation. Or perhaps you’d pick a country with swaths of blistering desert. At the very least, somewhere notoriously hot and sunny. Right?
Well, you would be wrong. The global leader is Hungary, according to a recent report from think tank Ember that pulls from full-year 2024 data and only considers nations that generated over 5 terawatt-hours of solar.
The Central European country got nearly one-quarter of its electricity from solar panels last year, leapfrogging Chile, which had held the top spot since 2021. Hungary’s win is no fluke: From January through October this year, solar grew to account for about one-third of power generated in the nation of 10 million.
It’s quite the shift. Just five years ago, Hungary got only 7% of its power from solar. Ember attributes the rapid growth to robust policies supporting both utility-scale and residential installations.
Rounding out the top five countries on Ember’s list are Greece, Spain, and the Netherlands. The top 10 is dominated by countries in the European Union, which is chipping away at coal- and gas-fired electricity.
To be clear, Hungary is not producing more electrons with solar panels than any other country. That distinction goes to China, which generates far more terawatt-hours’ worth of clean power than anywhere else, even if it only gets about 8% of its electricity from solar.
We’ll check back in next year to see if Hungary has retained its improbable title. The competition will be stiff. After all, the solar boom is a worldwide phenomenon.