> I would humbly suggest that in future you try to avoid using rhetorical questions to make a point when the rhetorical question can be answered by google.

It was not a rhetorical question.

Furthermore the first hit on Google is:

"GE, DOE Accelerating the Path towards 100% Hydrogen"

The rest of the results are various reports of testing, research and trials.

None of these refute the original quote from the 2023 Lazard report:

"Combustion turbines for 100% hydrogen are not commercially available today."

Neither does the link you provided, which is full of weasel words.

As such 100% hydrogen combustion turbines very much do not seem to be a solved problem. I will concede that there appear to be some prototype/experimental 100% hydrogen combustion turbines, which is great. Still no commercial availability, tho.

Siemens (from the first page of Google results) probably has a more realistic take on the matter:

" H₂ capabilities of our medium-sized gas turbines

As of today, the gas turbines we're testing in our new Zero Emission Hydrogen Turbine Center are ready to burn up to 75% of hydrogen in the fuel mix. And step by step we aim to reach 100% by 2030."

So, perhaps we can agree that 100% hydrogen combustion turbines are an aspirational technology. Something that might come about in the next decade or so.

> The fact that these rhetorical questions carry what appears to be a distinctly anti environmental agenda doesnt exactly make this incuriosity better.

LOL.

I will begin by reminding you of the Hacker News guidelines:

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

I will continue with noting the we, in Finland, produce about 90% (IIRC) of our electricity without fossile fuel emissions. How are you guys doing?

So you can take your "anti environmental agenda" and do something interesting with it in dark, enclosed spaces.

Sidestepping the incorrect use of "rhetorical", I do wonder what it is about facts and relevant questions that get under the skin of some people?

Is it just the embarrassment of realizing that one's arguments are without merit or the facing one's inability to coherently explain metters?