Not to mention hydrogen embrittlement. Hydrogen is a "slippery" molecule and can even escape solid steel pipes. As the molecule passes through the pipe it creates a phenomenon called hydrogen embrittlement. Steel is eventually weakened to the point of failure. This is not only a safety issue, but a maintenance nightmare. Steel pipes need to be replaced a much faster rate when used with Hydrogen. I understand there are coating now to mitigate this problem, but they add cost and complexity.

I agree with the leaking, however, there is tons of methane that naturally leaks out from numerous sources in the earths crust. In the grand scheme of things, the leaks would be insignificant "IF" they stopped the general burning of carbon fuels for shipping.

I don't agree with you on putting the chemicals back. Fracking is a completely different process that pumps a hydraulic fluid down the holes . Carbon capture and sequestering from natural gas hydrogen would pump the chemicals back down dead wells. It would not use hydraulic forces to try and create fractures in the crust. Simply put the unwanted chemicals back in a chamber that is now empty.

Agree %100.. Right now its time to grab the low hanging fruit. When there is none of that left, then we move on to the harder problems. If we could eliminate daily personal travel and home heating energy usage that would be HUGE!

Thank you.. Yup brain fart..

We %100 could.. However, its usually a bad idea to make a basic human resource compete with fuel. This is why fuel from crops is a bad idea.

Traditional hydrolysis of seawater is a super wasteful process. The water must be desalinated first using reverse osmosis or distillation. Then chemicals (usually potassium hydroxide) can be added back to the water to allow "clean" hydrogen to be generated.

Straight hydrolysis of sea water creates chlorine gas. Not only is chlorine gas highly toxic (used as a chemical agent during WWI and WWII), but very hard on equipment. Not to mention you would have to figure out how to dispose of it. Thus the desalination first.

This makes "green" hydrogen from sea water very costly. You are just better off to use that wind and/or solar energy elsewhere as you get more bang for your buck. It also means that green hydrogen simply cannot compete with natural gas derived hydrogen.

That brings up another topic. Hydrogen from natural gas can also be green. The process strips the hydrogen from the natural gas leaving you with the remaining chemicals (mostly carbon). Those chemicals "could" then be returned back down the well. Of course that also adds costs and no company will do it unless regulation requires it.