Blue or Green? Exploring Australian acceptance and beliefs about hydrogen production methods

Abstract

Large-scale hydrogen production will be required to provide sufficient hydrogen for planned applications. In Australia, and other countries, two main hydrogen productions methods have been proposed: hydrogen produced using renewables (green hydrogen) and hydrogen produced with fossil fuels and CCS (blue hydrogen). It is, to date, unclear how people think about the different attributes of these production methods and the extent to which the public's support for each approach influence downstream applications. Using an online survey instrument, this study explored how manipulating the hydrogen production method (green vs blue) influenced beliefs and public attitudes toward to production approach and various applications. The results revealed that beliefs differed depending on the production method presented but effect sizes were quite small overall. The effect was, however, more pronounced with those who more strongly endorse an environmental preservation attitude. The findings, overall, suggest that there is slightly stronger support for green hydrogen production, which is informed by the beliefs that blue hydrogen is a replaceable technology, will conflict with renewable electricity production and will have negative environmental impacts. The research emphasizes the importance of researchers and industry to show that blue hydrogen is a viable long-term option that will compliment, not conflict with, renewable electricity production. Additionally, the findings suggest that blue hydrogen projects will gain stronger support if they can demonstrate minimal local environmental impacts and limited carbon emissions.