Commissioner Wallström's Speech on Hydrogen - bridge to sustainable energy

Summary: June 17, 2003: Speech by Margot Wallström, Member of the European Commission responsible for Environment, on " Hydrogen - bridge to sustainable energy ", at the High Level Group on Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Conference (Brussels)

Ladies and gentlemen,

Welcome to the last plenary session during this Commission Conference on Hydrogen.

In his welcome address yesterday, President Prodi pointed out why this Conference is important for the environment. Hydrogen creates big opportunities for an environmentally sustainable energy and transport system - for cleaner air in our cities and for combating climate change. President Prodi also underlined the role that renewables should play in the hydrogen economy.

Different hydrogen production pathways is what this sessionwill look at. The report by the High-Level Group is a good basis for this discussion. I would like to congratulate the High Level Group for bringing forward a vision on the hydrogen economy that will greatly help us in putting Europe at the forefront of developments in this exciting field.

I will not go into a comparative analysis of different energy sources for producing hydrogen and will leave this to the members on our panel. I instead want to give you my starting point in the hydrogen debate, and that is climate change.

The challenge of climate change

The scientific community now firmly believes that man-made climate change is real and that it will lead to higher global temperatures, with serious consequences for our economies and our environment and in terms of human suffering. The impact of a changing climate may already be visible for example in a reduction of snow cover in the mid and high latitudes of the northern hemisphere by about 10 per cent since the late 1960s. Globally, the 1990s were the warmest decade since 1861. These are signs that we must not ignore. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has forecast that globally averaged surface temperature will increase by 1.4 to 5.8° Celsius from 1990 to 2100 under business-as-usual. This means that sea levels could rise by between 0.09 and 0.88 metres.

Mankind simply cannot afford to take these risks. And let us always remember that climate change is far more than an environmental issue - it is a challenge to future economic sustainability as well.

It is always good to consider what the implications of climate change would be. What would a sea-level rise of between 0.09 and 0.88 metres mean? It might well mean that a country like Tuvalu in the South Pacific simply disappears. Tuvalu is nine coral atolls half-way between Hawaii and Australia, and its highest altitude is 5 metres above sea level. Tuvalu has about 11,150 inhabitants, and New Zealand has already granted the Tuvaluans an immigration contingent as environmental refugees.

Or think of Bangladesh with its 133 million inhabitants, a coast line of 580 kilometres and most of the country not rising above 100 metres. Already today many of the inhabitants are landless and forced to live on and cultivate flood-prone land, and during each summer monsoon season much of the country is routinely inundated. Population density is very high. Can we imagine what rising sea levels would mean for Bangladesh?

Today, more than 110 countries, representing two thirds of the world's population, have endorsed the Kyoto Protocol. However, the Kyoto Protocol is only a first step. When we look at what needs to be done to stop climate change, it can look daunting! Scientists tell us that we have to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 70 per cent world-wide.

But, as Einstein said, "In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity. "

Hydrogen as a response to climate change …

This brings me back to the question of hydrogen. Hydrogen and fuel cells certainly hold great promise for the improvement of the environment, and from an economic point of view.

Firstly, when using hydrogen in fuel cells or turbines, important energy efficiency gains are to be expected.

Secondly, fuel cells convert hydrogen into electricity with no air pollution and low noise.

Thirdly, hydrogen can be produced from a variety of primary energy sources, thereby enhancing energy security. Back in 1976, in the midst of the first oil crisis, the Club of Rome was considering that "at the eve of the 21st century, we should consider the juxtaposition of two networks of equal importance: electricity and hydrogen."

These are important potential benefits, and there are others.

… if we get it right

However the most exciting prospect that the vision of a hydrogen economy holds, is the opportunity to move away from a fossil fuel based energy system towards one that is based predominantly on renewable energy. I am pleased to see that the report of the high level group acknowledges this as the final goal we should aim for. This brings me to the most complex and, from a policy perspective, most crucial issues of all: the production of hydrogen and the roadmap for transition. Due to their complexity, many aspects need further investigation and discussion.

I would like to bring a number of observations to your attention though.

Many researchers, both in industry and academia, have demonstrated the tremendous discrepancy in terms of greenhouse gas emissions between the various pathways for the production of hydrogen. Those pathways that are based primarily on continued use of fossil resources, in particular coal and oil, may even lead to rising greenhouse gas emissions. CO2 capture and storage, for instance in oil and gas reservoirs, if it can be made to work, might be part of the solution. For the technology to move ahead though we need to demonstrate that it is cost-effective and environmentally sound on a long-term basis. Politically, however CO2 capture and storage cannot replace efforts to change our energy system and consumption patterns or to implement the Kyoto Protocol.

Nuclear energy is of course CO2 neutral and could be used to produce hydrogen. Everyone has his or her own views on nuclear energy. It is a fact that most Member States do not see nuclear as a long-term energy option at this stage. There are concerns about safety and that we have not yet solved the problem of storage of nuclear waste. If we think of a global hydrogen economy, it would also raise important security concerns, for instance in the context of proliferation of nuclear technology.

I conclude that our overall goal should be to make renewables the most important source of energy for the production of hydrogen. Of course, this is not going to happen overnight. It is a vision - and a vision that is as challenging as the emergence of the hydrogen economy itself. In this vision, hydrogen, renewables and energy efficiency are the three pillars of a sustainable energy future. Just as for hydrogen and fuel cells, building the renewable pillar will require a major, sustained effort with actions very similar to the five actions mentioned by the high level group. It must become an integral part of our overall hydrogen strategy.

As I said, this will require time and effort, but let's bear in mind that some renewable technologies are taking off today. Wind energy is the fastest growing energy source in the world and Europe is leading in this area. In the future, the production of hydrogen may provide a new outlet for wind energy. The same would apply if large-scale solar energy production were to become widely available.

I sometimes hear the argument that the potential of renewables will never be sufficient to meet future energy demand. However, let us not get trapped in forecasts - this question is also about political choices. We should first of all not forget that the biggest energy source might well be energy efficiency. We should not take the demand side for given and outside our reach.

Secondly, to what extent renewables develop also depends on how much we support them. This means everything from research and technological development to addressing market barriers to internalising external costs, for example by abolishing fossil fuel subsidies. I have noted that the new Shell scenarios to 2050 assume that renewables - mainly solar and geothermal energy - have the potential to cover all energy needs for 10 billion people and on condition that intermittent sources can be stored. Europe and Asia might still depend on energy imports, but renewables in other world regions by far exceed these regions' needs.

In my own view therefore we need to complement a roadmap for hydrogen and fuel cells with a roadmap for expanding the share of renewables to our energy supply so that hydrogen can be produced from renewables.

The hydrogen economy will always only be as environmentally sustainable as the energy mix that produces the hydrogen.

I trust that our panellists will address some of the issues that I have touched on.

Concluding remarks

Ladies and gentlemen,

Someone once jokingly said that "the stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones, and the oil age will end much before we run out of oil." I hope that history will vindicate the prediction that we will dramatically reduce our dependence on fossil fuels even before they become scarce, in the interest of stabilising our climate.

Hydrogen could be a 'cool' solution to the 'hot' topic of climate change.

I thank you for your attention.

Ref: SP03-230EN
EU source: European Commission
UN forum:
Date: 17/6/2003

| Top |

< Back to previous page