Electrolyzers Help Heat Up the Great Hydrogen Debate

the world, from the US to Europe to China. The conditions are right for growth, but let's think about how much money is this actually going to require, and what technologies are the front runners, and also what will be the emerging fuel source to make all of this hydrogen, and will it be more locally produced or shipped around the world, and a lot of other questions. So on today's episode, I get to speak with Adithia Bashum and

Matthew Bravante. They are both hydrogen analysts at b F. Note that B and EF does not provide investment or strategy advice, and we have a full disclaimer at the end of the show. But now I want to talk about hydrogen with Addie and Matt. Let's have a listen. Addie, thank you for joining the show today. Hight A great to be here, and Matt thank you for joining as well. Thanks. Dana, happy to be here great, So we have two members of our team that focus on hydrogen here to talk

about electrolyzers. And for the uninitiated, that begs the question, what is an electrolyzer. An electrolyzer is it's fundamentally a piece of equipment to gas separating piece of equipment. So it takes water and electricity and separates that into two gases, hydrogen and oxygen. So it's a way to produce hydrogen gas, which we'll get into as a range of applications. But it's a way to produce hydrogen gas without any sort

of residual carbon leading the system. So it starts with a carbon free source of hydrogen water and ends up with a hydrogen product that can be considered zero carbon emissions depending on the electricity source. And the zero carbon emissions aspect is why hydrogen is likely to take off? Is that correct? Yeah? I think hydrogen it's gone through many boom and bus phases of excitement, but fundamentally, the thing that's exciting about it is it can be used

as a molecule for chemical applications. It can be used as an energy molecule, but at the point of use

because it's a molecule with no embedded carbon. So when you think of conventional hydrocarbons, they're usually some amount of carbon molecules some amount of hydrogen molecules, and when they're combusted or used in industry, there's usually some sort of oxidation reaction which creates c O two, which is released in the atmosphere, and we all know that is a negative outcome with hydrogen, but there is no carbon in the molecule, so when it's oxidized or used in some

other chemical application, usually the byproduct is a bit of heat and some water, So much better for the world

in terms of carbon question. What's interesting about hydrogen or low carbon hydrant specifically is that as a molecule it can replace uses where it's already being used today, where it's produced from fossil fuels, for example as a feedstock for industry, but to produce ammonia in oil refineries, to produce methanol, all these chemicals that we really depend on, and also as a molecule to decarbonize other sectors with hydrogen is not used today, for example in steel, where

it can help reduce iron oxide to iron and be precursor to green steel. So an important molecule for the future, would we think about decarbonizing And what we're going to talk about today really is you've done this forward looking market outlook on the electroalizer market, and to use your own term, you say that the market is about to take off. What do you mean by that? And why is it about to take off? I guess there'll be a lot of this kind of onion to unpeel here.

I guess In short, what is it that has put us at this precipice our starting point? Our Global Electoralizer Outlook twenty thirty is really the Hydrogant team's first attempt at assessing policies by region, looking at announced projects and aggregate and looking at the economics of producing carbon hydrogen in certain locations, putting all of that knowledge together in one document and come up with an estimate for how many giga outs of electrolyzer capacity we can see deployed

by the end of this decade. Yeah, I think the reference you're onion the first kind of thing to peel back, and the real impetus around this report is just, at least in my mind, it's the funding that we've seen come online for hydrogen in the past twelve to eighteen months from very large federal or regional government levels, and I think when you think about the long term or the the medium to long term out a lot of that activity is going to be driven by public financing,

public support. It's very analogous to the way wind and solar initially got their boost and climbed down the cost curves. We think we're seeing similar type of incentives for hydrogen, and we think that will help hydrogen climb down the same sort of cost curves get to a point where we're going from now where we hardly use what we would call renewable hydrogen or electrolytic hydrogen to a point where in ten years we could be using a serious

amount of this stuff. And it really starts with many million billions of dollars that we see coming across the world from different governments to help this technology get a footing, so in ten years the cost declines, maybe at a place where private industry is ready to take it over. If you are really going to draw that parallel between solar and wind and other renewables that have a really

low levelised cost of electricity. So now that we're talking about hydrogen the fact that policy plays such an important role in the next decade. For it where in the world, and I guess which governments are supporting it. So where we see the strongest policy support within our global electrocalizer outlook is within Europe, US and China. Like the biggest markets leading on hydrogen will be these in terms of deployment. We can talk about each one individually, but I'll start

with Europe. Europe really wants to become a hydrogen champion in terms of technology deployment, in terms of expertise, it is developing within this sector and has been on the forefront of trying to set standards for hydrogen production and also setting the subsidies that they are leading. At the same time, China has been building manufacturing expertise within the sector, especially in electrolyzer technology. They have much larger factories already

building much larger projects. So for comparison, we in Europe, the biggest project that we have today is about twenty megawats and sizes. In comparison, in China we already have about a hundred fifty megawat project commission and next year we expect another two hundred sixty megawats project to be commissioned. So in terms of size, China is already establishing projects that are an order of magnitude larger than what we're seeing in Europe. And the last one is the U

S which I think Matt can comment on. Yeah, and just to bring in the global perspective on it, I think when we at a high level, when we think about how these governments subsidize hydrogen, there's a couple different ways to do it. In China, it's very much a heavy hand of government approach, having big industrial users of hydrogen adopt low carbon practices to kind of hit their emissions peak by twenty thirties at the national government it wants to hit. In the US, you see a very

different approach. It's pretty much all on the supply side. Um. There was recently passed as a part of the Inflation Production Act hydrogen production tax credit, the first ever hydrogen production tax credit in the world, which is just gonna make hydrogen extremely cheap to produce in the States and then it will kind of be up to the demand side to figure out, now we have this cheap hydrogen,

what are we gonna use it for? And then you see in Europe which you know Addie can talk about in much greater detail, kind of a hybrid approach where there's going to be a fiscal incentives on the production side, there's probably going to be some element of demand side incentives for the use of hydrogen. Were really kind of trying to balance the approach in the US UM specifically, and in North America Canada is taking. It looks like Canada's going to take a very similar approach, but it's

really a supply side story driven by low economics. So the production tax credit that the US just passed is going to make without any other subsidies you know, coming online and other regions, is going to make the US the cheapest place to produce hydrogen in the entire world through when the tax credit expires. So we think that there's there was very little activity in the US before this. Europe has been signaling for a few years now that

they had very strong hydrogen ambitions. China is much the same. In the US, it wasn't It was a pretty quiet market and then seemingly out of nowhere, really out of the last twelve months, we've gotten this hydrogen production tax credit ount of the Biden administration, which really changes the game in terms of level life costs of hydrogen and then in terms of what you can do with it as an energy molecule or chemical molecule when you have

it at such a low price. What's really interesting right now in Europe is Europe, and in european industry is now looking at the US and the Inflation Reduction Act and seeing that as a huge opportunity to deploy capacity within the US and now using that as a way to justify more subsidies within Europe. So there's very much a race going on or like people, the industry is making it a race of like who has the better

framework to deploy hydrogen projects. So both in the stories are currently learning from each other, which is interesting in terms of what what will come out of this. Yeah, and it's very much like a I mean, I don't know if we go so far as call it a competition. It's very much like who has the most funding, who has the best funding? You know, where do the project developers want to go? Where does the capital that's going

to deploy this stuff want to go? And it's kind of been a five months ago it was all in Europe and the inflation reduction happens, and we're talking to folks in Europe who are quite jealous and see a lot of capital moving to the US. So it's very much a game of tag here between the US and you in terms public dollars in public support well in a forward looking race for cost declines in terms of hydrogen production, But what's it going to cost in order

to drive that? And I guess how much money it's been committed to be spent on driving the cost down. So we tracked this every six months as part of a hydrogen market outlook globally. We're now seeing as of June this year, we're seeing about hundred twenty six billion dollars committed in funding for hydrogen or to which hydrogen projects can apply. So this includes both direct subsidies to the hydroen industry or technology neutral funds for climate protection

in some sense where hydrogen projects can also apply. In terms of where we see it as funding being split out at the US and European Union are really leading within this funding. Whereas European Union fundings is capped by a budget, the US doesn't necessarily have a budget, and Matt can definitely speak to that as well. Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting one, and we can when we get into kind of analysis behind the report and kind of

how we set our outlook here. We used a lot of the publicly available information the government, mainly how much money they thought they were going to spend. Some of the systems are a finite pool of money, so the government says we're going to get An example in the US is the Infrastructure Bill is going to give eight billion dollars to projects. And really the only variable you can play with when setting an outlook like this is

how cheap is the equipment to produce the hydrogen? Because you get eight billion dollars to build it, and whatever that costs to do per unit of of capital cost, that's how much hydrogen you get. But then there are other buckets like the production tax credit, where there's a set of rules that a project developer has to adhere to around wage requirements, around life cycle emissions of the hydrogen production system. But if you qualify to those rules,

you get the tax credit. And and the federal government has released their estimations on how much they think it will cost them, we actually think it's going to be a bit more expensive than they're anticipating, but it's really, however many people want to come get it and adhere to the rules, is going to be the final number

that gets deployed financially speaking. So there's a bit of that in the US and around the world, and it'll it will certainly be interesting to see how accurate some of these forecasts from the budget offices of these various

governments end up being. Now for a very short break, stay with us now, because hydrogen requires an energy source in order to make it, and I know we could spend time talking about the whole color wheel and all of the different colors associated with the different fuel sources, but let's actually instead talk about exactly what it is is that we want to get to renewables. If we're going to make hydrogen from renewables in the US, in China,

in Europe, anywhere in the world. Is the amount of renewables required in order to actually supply all of that energy coming online? Is that being considered as a part of this hydrogen development. Sure, I can give you some numbers around our global Electrolyzer forecast that help frame this discussion. In our forecast that we've said based on policies across regions.

We the hydrogen electrolyzer market girls from about two giga wats of electroalizers deployed by the end of this year to about two hundred forty gigawatts cumulatively deployed by the end of this decade by twenty thirty. That's about over a hundred fold increase in installed capacity. All of these electrolyzer, as you say, will need electricity, and likely renewable electricity, So we estimated these electroalizers need about one thousand, three

hundred tera hours of electricity by twenty thirty. One thousand, three other terror hours is about four percent scent of all global electricity demand. And this four percent number is pretty much the same as we see, for example, electric vehicles and NEOs economic transition scenarios. To put that into context, so we need to be not only for electrifying vehicles industry and so on, but also hydro production in the

same order of magnitude. What's interesting about sort of the electricity side of things as well for electrolyzers is that this number varies quite a bit. So while it might be four percent in China or the US, it's about eleven of all the electricity produced in Europe and manned in Europe will need to go to electrolyzers to deploy the capacity we see it in Europe. And this electrolyzing

capacity if it comes from renewables. In a scenario where we assume that about half of this electrolyzed capacities electricity supply is supplied by its solar, we get to about six hundred seventy gigawatts of renewable energy capacity, so both solar,

onshore wind, and offshore wind. And we compared that to b nfs A solar and wind forecasts out to twenty thirty And what this number really means is that sixteen percent of all the renewables that we estimate are built between now and twenty would need to go to electrolyzes. So either they are built on top of our existing forecast or some of it is diverted away from existing uses for that electricity. Wow, that is a huge amount of additional electricity that needs to be developed for this use.

But then I guess that brings me to the question what is the potential for hydrogen to bring down emissions? Because hydrogen is oftentimes talked about is a fuel for the hard to abate space and the things that we really don't have, at least today, viable solutions for decarbonizing their emissions. So do we have a view on what

the potential is for emissions reduction with this investment. I think there's a really important point that our team makes a lot, and it's probably seen as quite controversial in the hydrogen twitter verse or whatever public forum you're reading your hydrogen news in the context of how many go lots of renewables we will need just to get to and if you look at the production numbers of hydrogen, we're still not even close to replacing the hydrogen that

we use today, the carbon intensive hydrogen. So I think in terms of emissions reduction essential the most important question to ask is what are we using the hydrogen for and is that the best use of the hydrogen from an emissions reduction standpoint. And we've been speaking about this long time. Our founder Mikelibrick famously has his hydrogen ladder. But there's a set of industries where we think hydrogen is going to be extremely critical to reducing the emissions intensity.

Things like chemical production in methanol and ammonia fuels, refining, both conventional oil refining and also sustainable fuel refining, like sustainable aviation, fuels, renewable diesel, things such as that. Where hydrogen is really going to be needed no matter what, and what's going to be a really high impact area, we can get low carbon or carbon free hydrogen into the space. And there are other places where you know, you definitely can use hydrogen it's completely feasible, like road

based transport, things like power generation. Hydrogen, at least in the near term, is going to be a pretty precious resource. So can we incentivize hydrogen to go into the areas where it's going to make the largest emissions impact. There's a big question. And if we can do that, then yeah, there's quite a bit of potential to reduce emissions from these hard to debate sectors. I fully agree with Matt on this. It really depends on where that hydrogen is

being used. To give you an example, based on our outlook, all these electrolyzers that were saying are going to get built by twenty thirty produce about twenty five million tons of green hydrogen by twenty thirty. That's about a quarter a bit more than a quarter twenty seven percent of existing gray hydrogen demand. So hydrogen produced from fossil fuels. Current fossil fuel based hydrogen emits about eight to nine hundred million tons of carbon emissions a year, I believe.

So if the green hydrogen that is that we see being produced here is replacing gray hydro and you're looking at replacing about a quarter of the existing gray hydrant emissions, that could be reduced. Now, there are other uses where emissions could be higher, for example in steel because steel is currently produced using a coal so the emissions intensity of producing that is quite high, So the benefit of using hydra and could be higher. But these are real

choices and tradeoffs that need to be made. And on the demand side, how much of it do you see actually going to fuels versus industries That really depends. So I think in the near term a lot of the mandates and regulation that is being set around encouraging that the clean hydrant industry to develop, particularly is focused on industrial decarbonization, so that's where you see going into refineries,

ammonia production, methanol production, and so on. At the same time, when you see a lot from private actors as well as a push for using hydra and as transport fuels. Here we see really see the big potential in heavy duty transport to think about ships, planes, and some very heavy trucks that go very long distances and so on. There is some porsh for that, for example, in Europe, as much as they want to decarbonized industry, at the same time there are mandates being put in place to

decarbonized a small percentage of transport as well. But I think especially because in industry right now, hydrogen in the existing use cases is a drop in replacement. So ideally you can take out the gray hydrant and use the green hydrogen in your existing processes without changing much of the equipment. For fuels, you will need to build separate

plans to produce them in the first place. So, for example, when we talk about fuels, particularly, the way we're seeing hydrant being used in ships and planes is not as pure hydrogen, but as methanol or ammonia or kerosene that is produced synthetically from green hydrant with a carbon source. And for that we need production plants that actually produce these fields as well. So let's talk a little bit

about technology. There are a couple different technologies out there for hydrogen production, which ones are emerging as the front runner or is it too early to tell. I think we could talk about none of There's so many layers to the technology map of hydrogen technologies, but I think in its simplest form, the two most common technologies we often talk about our electrolytic pathways, so that's using electrolyzer

technologies and some sort of power source. And then what we define as thermo chemical pathways, which most commonly is the reformation of messane and steam, or there is the restoration of methane and absence of just normal air. But within those two technologies, there's a subset of technologies. On the electrolytic side, there's really two electrolyzer technologies vying for dominance.

There's line technologies and pen technologies, a proton exchange, membrane technologies, and we track these as as an input to our market outlook and other things, and I think the story really is still kind of a toss up in most

parts of the world. So if you exclude China, which you know is a pretty big to exclude, but if you exclude China from our latest market outlook, it's roughly a fifty fifty split between pen technologies and alkaline technologies in terms of which electroalizers developers are choosing to procure. But China is such a large market and they have such a dominant alkaline industry already that when you aggravate all the numbers, it looks like alkaline is really the

dominant technology. Or on the methane reformation side, there's really two technologies vying for dominance steam methane reformation and auto thermal reformation. There are two processes that are quite similar, and they have a couple of quirks that are different that we can get into. But we're actually seeing a lot of technology developers or project developers not making a call, a lot of unknown projects to date, but out of the projects that are announced, we see auto thermal reformation

leading the way. So it's still, i would say, just thinking about the market as a whole, it's still probably too early to call which technologies are gonna dominate. They'll probably each have some success in their own right, but that's the market as we're seeing it right now, and within a forecast. The way we see is developing at the moment is that very likely within China, alkaline dominates and continues to dominate production capacity in Europe and the US.

You'll see and even split between PM proto and exchange membrane technology and alkaline technology at the same time. So the cost China is such a dominant market, as Matt already said, until we see about seventy of capacity globally being alkaline electroalizers, and from then on the share of autlines slowly drops to about six until still the dominant technology.

But you can see how proton exchange membrane technology is already making in rows in that by the end of this decade is taken up a larger and larger market share. Now for a very short break stay with us. So even with the right policy environment, you definitely have private companies that are building a lot of this technology and deploying it. So on the supply side, what are some of the key names that we should know, What are

the companies that are doing this. There's definitely already established companies manufacturing companies who are looking into electoralizer as a new busines this area. These are for example, in Europe Siemens Energy, which produces other technologies like gas turbines already but also now getting into the business of producing electorallyzers, particularly proton exchange membering electoralizes that scale. In the US you have the same thing with companies like Commons who

produce other equipment but now coming into electoralizing business. Same with again the synchropland others like big established manufacturers who are now looking at the electrocizing business. At the same time, you now have emerging pure play hydrogen players within this which do nothing else other than electoralizers and maybe some

refueling stations. These are your nails of the world. So now in Norway, your I t M Power in the UK, your Plug Power in the US which also does other slightly other business but mostly focused on producing electrolyzers and fuel cells, so really focused on the hydrogen industry as

a whole. The last players all add to what Ali just said is there are some folks on the demand side, so people who could either conventionally use hydrogen as a drop in replacement for industrial applications or see a pathway to using hydrogen in their business model in some way really leaning it and trying to develop a hydrogen business for themselves. This is like mining company in Australia for

test key future industries. As you think of conventional energy players, oil players like the Exons and Chevrons of the world. You think of conventional gas producers, gas handlers, So the folks that make the carbon intensive hydrogen today, the air lia kids their products, the lens of the world, and then other folks, a lot of fertilizer companies getting into the ring, understanding that hydrogen is a major input to their process, maybe wanting to integrate a bit vertically up

into the hydrogen production space. So it's a healthy combination of people producing the technology and the upstream people in the downstream getting interested in understanding a bit more about how the changes are gonna work and if there's any opportunity for their business in this low carbon transition. But it's a pretty good mix of companies up and down the supply chain putting their hand up and getting interested. So putting myself in the shoes of someone in the

supply chain and putting my corporate strategist at on. If I'm working at one of these companies, what are some of the reasons I might be cautious and what are some of the barriers that may stand in the way of all of this growth? That we're talking about. So yeah, if I was in that position, you can see that governments are setting out huge targets, a lot of ambition on producing hydrogen, and the projects are not yet taking off, like very few final investment decisions in this space so far.

And a lot of that is one because a lot of the subsidies is particularly in Europe for example, are announced but haven't been given out yet or allocated yet. For example, Europe is talking about contracts for difference mechanisms to really encourage commercial projects that not just our pilots and test facilities, but really commercial projects. Those subsidies are not available yet, they will be available over the next year. A lot of that still needs to be figured out.

So one subsidy availability. The other one that both the US and Europe are trying to figure out is what actually counts a screen hydrogen. It's sound as simple as it is, but we don't have a clear definition across the board of under what conditions can hydrogen be produced

and be considered a green product. So that's not only the emissions threshold which is being set by the US and Europe and other countries, but also how do I encourage more renewables deployment to overcome this gap and sort of not having enough renewable's capacity to supply all these hydrogen production, how do I make sure that all these electrolyzers don't add too much additional demand on the electricity

grid and so on. So what the Europe is trying to define now the US is at the same point is can I produce hydrogen from renewables if I'm still connected to the grid, Like, under what conditions can I do that? Under what hour of the day can I do that? And so on. So that's really where a lot of the discussions is still going on, and then

we don't have a resolution yet. Yeah, Dana, we could spend a whole separate podcast just talking about this question, the question around grid connection, the time of use, additionality of renewables. These are really at the forefront of the policymakers and developers in Europe and in the States. It's a really important question. I think if I had to put my corporate strategy had on that would probably be

number one. And the number two is just the trickiest part of the hydrogen ecosystem right now is the mid stream. So thinking about transport and storage. It's famously the lightest gas, the smallest gas, and it's really tricky to just put it in a pipeline or put it on a ship

and get it to where it needs to go. Historically, hydrogen is almost always produced at the point of use, so they have a big hydrogen production facility right next to the refinery or ammonia facility that's going to be used in And that's because this mid stream aspect is so tricky. And when you start to think about the variable production of hydrogen from solar wind, so you're only producing it when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing, and you're feeding that into a system like

a refinery ammonia facility that has high uptime requirements. To the storage aspect gets really challenging. The transportation aspect of it gets really challenging if you want to put the renewables in one place and the electoralizer or the hydrogen

demand source and another. So I think when we get to thinking about the ten year forecast and what's going to be reality over the next decade when this stuff really scales, it's really going to be a question of what are the smartest ways to move this stuff and what are the smartest places to use it considering the challenges around the mid stream. This is why initially we as a team looking at this industry are seeing hydrogen

production and demand being very closely located together. So we're thinking about big hydrogen hubs where hydrogen is produced on site and delivered to an industrial cluster right next door, and where you overcome a lot of these issues around storage and transport, which needs to be figured out at one point as well, and on the other hand, also take a lot of time to develop. It takes like three to seven to ten years to develop a pipe,

a new pipeline for hydrogen. So while that is being developed, we see a lot of these hydrogen production and demand being co located because it's incredibly difficult to contain, is it not. Not only is it very light, but it can escape from a lot of different spaces quite easily. So the physical limitations and where we can store it and for how long are part of the restriction. Let's not sound too many alarms here. The hydrogen has been

moved around to pipelines for decades. It's heavily understood, it's heavily utilized, so there's no like technological hurdles to getting to the point where we can figure out the mid stream. I think from a global trade perspective, you hear a lot of folks saying they're gonna ship hydrogen from Australia to Europe, or Canada to Europe, or ship to Japan from South America and those there's a lot of head

scratching to be down there. If you're shipping hydrogen to be used as hydrogen and any of those methods, it just adds so much cost. You have to liquefy it, you have to compress it and ship a very small amount of it, or you can turn it into something like ammonia, which you know works if you're going to use it as ammonia in the final destination. But if you have to re crack it back into hydrogen, the

economics just really poor. So it's not so much a technological issue as is as it is an economic issue. But yeah, it's still one that we definitely need to figure out. And I guess the less thing I'll say not to dampen the party too much, but hydrogen itself is a gas with warming potential, and it doesn't make

that big of a difference today. But if we come to this world in where we are using a lot of hydrogen, we will need to come up with strict control measures for leakage because we don't want to trade

one greenhouse gas for another. And yeah, it'll it'll definitely be a consideration moving forward and seeing some parallels here actually with what you've just said regarding how we really think about natural gas, and in many respects at one point in time that it was lauded as this much less carbon intensive energy source that provided tremendous flexible capacity for wind and solar when they weren't able to produce.

But there's a lot of discussion now about actually phasing out natural gas use because of the emissions in the longer term. Do you think that hydrogen will have a similar trajectory or because of the places that it occupies in our energy and consumption space that where there really isn't a viable alternative, that it won't There's a lot

of talk about comparing hydrogen to natural gas today. Fundamentally, what we're trying to say within our market outlooks and what we're seeing as well, is that hydroen will occupy some of the spaces where natural gas is used today, for example an industry, but it would also not go into certain sectors where we don't think it makes sense to use hydrogen. We have better technologies, like, for example,

for home heating. In that sense, the hydrant industry will be smaller than the natural gas industry and you won't need to use all that equipment. Fundamentally, at this point in the industries that we're talking about, we're hydrogen is crucial. We don't really have an alternative to using de carbonized hydrogen. There might be some innovation coming along the way, and we're seeing that, for example and steel already where maybe hydrone will be used and it's probably the most mature

technology to use to the carbonized steel production. But we're also seeing new applications and new innovation and steel where you don't need hydrogen as if heed stock anymore at all. These are less mature and could come up. So there's still some open question marks about it, but generally speaking, we tend to focus on the sectors where we don't

have an alternative to using keen hydrogen today. Dana, I think I'm gonna come and respond to your initial question with a very firm no. I feel like it would be very incorrect and quite controversial to let's say our view is that we think there's hydrogen and natural gas will have a similar trajectory. I think fundamentally they're they're different things. There's a lot of parallels. You could see the same sort of concern about upstream leakage that you

see in natural gas. Hydrogen is obviously used or could be used in a lot of places where natural gas is used today. But the development of hydrogen is for a fundamentally different pursuit, and it's carbon free at the point of view, So I think there are two very different things. The overarching reason why our team exists NS and why folks are seriously thinking about hydrogen is the truth remains, if we want to get to net zero as quickly as possible, we are going to need energy

molecules to do some things. We are going to need energy molecules to do nearly as much as they do today. But net zero by twenty fifty looks almost impossible just

using electrons. So high drogen will undertake some of the roles that natural gas did, probably won't have as large of an energy footprint as natural gas house today, that's not what we're expecting for it to be, but it will be pretty critical energy molecule, that is, carbon tree that can help get us the last way there in terms of net zero in a few of these really difficult sectors. So, Matt, you already gave me an idea

for a future podcast. So thank you so much for that, because I'm always on the search for what the next switched On is going to be. And for today, Addie, Matt, thank you so much for joining and explaining what we're thinking about when we think about the electoralizer market and where hydrogen is going to go in the future. Thanks for having us, Dana. Thanks Dana. Look forward to come back and talk more hydrogen soon. Today's episode of switched On was edited by Rex Warner of gray Stoke Media.

Bloomberg any F as a service provided by Bloomberg Finance LP and its affiliates. This recording does not constitute, nor should it be construed as investment advice, investment recommendations, or recommendation as to an investment or other strategy. Bloomberg any F should not be considered as information sufficient upon which

to base an investment decision. Neither Bloomberg Finance LP, nor any of its affiliates, makes any representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this recording, and any liability of this recording is expressly disclaimed