Much of this debunking of hydrogen hype (on which #NetZero depends), could have been produced by someone dismissed from public debate for being a 'climate denier'. What gives it away as 'green' is the author's dependence on equally unfeasible policies. https://greenallianceblog.org.uk/2021/02/11/pursuing-the-hydrogen-economy-as-a-climate-solution-will-be-a-big-mistake/

It is published by the main green lobby in Parliament, the Green Alliance. It says, "If the UK government is serious about decarbonisation, it should pursue a strategy of electrifying everything possible, as soon as possible."

But that's not feasible, either.

It was pointed out by me and @MhehedZherting here.

But the article claims things like, "Heat pumps are a much better option for heating buildings than hydrogen boilers."

They aren't. They are vastly more expensive than natural gas boilers to install, and require substantial changes to the homes they are installed in.

Heat pumps require space to install the heat pump and outside appliances, and hot water tank, and bigger radiators. The author has not considered the economics & other implications.

It underlines again the point that the green lobby (the @GreenAllianceUK) has successfully engineered a cross-party consensus on policy, but has not overcome the problems of the Net Zero agenda:

* the technology doesn't exist
* the economics don't work
* nobody voted for it.

The UK's #NetZero plans *depend* on hydrogen, CCS and 'behaviour change'.

That's not subjective interpretation, by a climate change denier. That's cold, hard, fact, stated by the CCC.

The green lobby got its targets, but has put the horse before the cart in every way possible.

The democratic deficit created by climate policy is going to turn into a vast credibility gap, and then into something far worse.

The time for greens to raise objections to techniques was circa 2005, when they were lobbying MPs for 'legally-binding' emissions reduction targets.

You can't make 'legally binding' targets to reduce gravity or to change the speed of light, or to conjure something out of nothing.

Why weren't the first questions, 'how can it be done?' and 'how much will it cost?'?