Massarweh Osama, Bicer Yusuf, Abushaikha Ahmad
Division of Sustainable Development, College of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Education City, Qatar Foundation, P.O. Box 34110, Doha, Qatar.
Sci Rep. 2025 Aug 12;15(1):29601. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-14686-6.
Hydrogen ([Formula: see text]) is emerging as a key alternative to fossil fuels in the global energy transition. This study presents a comparative techno-economic analysis of [Formula: see text] and natural gas (NG), focusing on safety hazards, energy output, [Formula: see text] emissions, and cost-effectiveness aspects. Our analysis showed that, compared to NG and other highly flammable gases like acetylene ([Formula: see text]) and propane ([Formula: see text]), [Formula: see text] has a higher hazard potential due to factors such as its wide flammability range, low ignition energy, and high flame speed. In terms of energy output, 1 kg of NG produces 48.60 MJ, while conversion to liquefied natural gas (LNG), grey [Formula: see text], and blue [Formula: see text] reduces energy output to 45.96 MJ, 35.45 MJ, and 31.21 MJ, respectively. Similarly, while unconverted NG emits 2.72 kg of [Formula: see text] per kg, emissions increase to 3.12 kg for LNG and 3.32 kg for grey [Formula: see text]. However, blue [Formula: see text] significantly reduces [Formula: see text] emissions to 1.05 kg per kg due to carbon capture and storage. From an economic perspective, producing 1 kg of NG yields a profit of $0.011. Converting NG to grey [Formula: see text] is most profitable, yielding a net profit of $0.609 per kg of NG, while blue [Formula: see text], despite higher production costs, remains viable with a profit of $0.390 per kg of NG. LNG conversion also shows profitability with $0.061 per kg of NG. This analysis highlights the trade-offs between energy efficiency, environmental impact, and economic viability, providing valuable insights for stakeholders formulating hydrogen and LNG implementation strategies.
氢气（[化学式：见原文]）正在成为全球能源转型中化石燃料的关键替代能源。本研究对[化学式：见原文]和天然气（NG）进行了技术经济比较分析，重点关注安全危害、能源产出、[化学式：见原文]排放和成本效益方面。我们的分析表明，与NG以及乙炔（[化学式：见原文]）和丙烷（[化学式：见原文]）等其他高度易燃气体相比，由于其可燃范围宽、点火能量低和火焰速度高等因素，[化学式：见原文]具有更高的潜在危险性。在能源产出方面，1千克NG产生48.60兆焦耳的能量，而转化为液化天然气（LNG）、灰色[化学式：见原文]和蓝色[化学式：见原文]后，能量产出分别降至45.96兆焦耳、35.45兆焦耳和31.21兆焦耳。同样，未转化的NG每千克排放2.72千克[化学式：见原文]，LNG的排放量增加到3.12千克，灰色[化学式：见原文]的排放量增加到3.32千克。然而，由于碳捕获和储存，蓝色[化学式：见原文]将[化学式：见原文]排放量显著降低至每千克1.05千克。从经济角度来看，生产1千克NG可获利0.011美元。将NG转化为灰色[化学式：见原文]最有利可图，每千克NG可获得净利润0.609美元，而蓝色[化学式：见原文]尽管生产成本较高，但每千克NG仍有0.390美元的利润，仍具有可行性。LNG转化也具有盈利能力，每千克NG可获利0.061美元。该分析突出了能源效率、环境影响和经济可行性之间的权衡，为制定氢气和LNG实施战略的利益相关者提供了有价值的见解。
