According to Dr. Jack Lewnard at ARPA-E, electricity costs about $100 to $250/MW-hr to deliver when amortizing the costs of the expanded grid infrastructure needed for electrification. The costs of expanding the gas grid for hydrogen (which is less energy dense than gas and requires changes to equipment) would be slightly less. Meanwhile, synthesized hydrocarbons (e.g. from direct air capture) could require essentially no changes to the gas grid

Grid concerns will likely be one of the factors that determines the energy carrier of the future.

> The costs of expanding the gas grid for hydrogen (which is less energy dense than gas and requires changes to equipment) would be slightly less.

I seriously doubt this. Hydrogen is notoriously difficult to work with and also, it has no natural source. It has to be generated from some other energy source.

True in the developed world.

However, there are quite a few existing Diesel engines in the developing world where the grid isn’t as sorted.

Now, I don’t know if hydrogen distribution would be a bigger challenge than just solving electrical distribution. But it does seem like this is a technology that could have some purpose. I mean, what about retrofitting diesel backup generators?

Hydrogen is more difficult to transport than electricity, by far.

Hydrogen is easier to transport than electricity because it can be pipelined and stored in tanks/caverns.

So can CNG, which is where most hydrogen comes from anyway. Just cut out the middle step and do a CNG conversion. They’re mature, less likely to leak, and don’t attack metals.

The point is to make it from electrolysis of water.