Hydrogen Is Not Viable

Moved from TheComingOilCrisis

Hydrogen, with its completely new distribution and storage infrastructure, is a similar non-starter. The problem isn't to transport a few kilos of the stuff, but millions of tons every single year. And cheaply! No -- the problem is to generate the hydrogen: it takes energy to do that.

The USA is not building new refineries, but is researching and developing myriad ways of developing production methods for converting water, methanol, coal and biomass into a non-polluting fuel source (Hydrogen) in forms which are compact and safe.

"In this century, the greatest environmental progress will come about - through technology and innovation. Tonight, I'm proposing $1.2 billion in research funding so that America can lead the world in developing clean, hydrogen-powered automobiles."President George W. Bush, State of the Union Speech, January 28, 2003.

(Image - Courtesy Canadian Firm -Ballard) The USA is also developing designs for new transports which utilize Hydrogen in innovative ways. It has ignored an intermediate approach of hybrid operation in favor of direct conversion via fuel-cells. Doesn't that also say something?

Hydrogen fuel cells have been known for decades and still aren't commercially viable. Doesn't that tell you something?

: It is obvious what that says: A commercially viable system has not been rolled out. Fuel cells are but the first part of a complex manufacturing system which will incorporate the technology. The economies of scale are not found in research models. That should also be obvious.
: So the same industry that couldn't break into the residential market because their systems cost in the tens of thousands of dollars, will crack the automobile market? The same automobile market where the power output must be several times higher, the generator must be many times smaller and lighter, and the cost has to be in the thousands of dollars? And all of this will be achieved through the magic of economies of scale, right?

And exactly what are those elusive, magical even, methods of storing hydrogen which are compact and safe? Did you forget inexpensive as well?

: The internet is full of reports of not just one, but myriad ways of manufacturing, storing and utilizing hydrogen as a 21st century fuel source, and since wikizens are not unaware of how to find them, I will not take the space here to list them.
: Oh, right, like all those schemes utilizing platinum and/or palladium.
: Or other exotic materials, like nickel.
: Another thing the internet is full of is crap, so why don't you tell us about some of those hydrogen storage schemes so promising they've never made the papers.

letter to the editor of Chemical and Engineering News (August 25, 2003 Volume 81, Number 34) concerning hydrogen fuel cell technology.

The total cost (without subsidy) of proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel-cell engines (fuel cells, power conditioning, electric motors, and so on) with mass low enough to be practical in a vehicle is in the range of $3,000-$7,000 per kW--40 times that of the advanced diesel engine. It is worth noting that PEM fuel cells have been in use and development for 40 years, and costs have not yet begun to drop significantly--notwithstanding many assertions to the contrary (such as those in the June 16 article) that use artificial costs from heavily subsidized projects or cite costs of massive, stationary fuel cells that are unsuitable for vehicles.

Safety-approved affordable compressed-gas cylinders achieve 1.5% H2 storage by mass at 34 MPa (5,000 psi). A $25,000 carbon-fiber-wrapped fuel tank achieving 6% H2 storage seems impractical for the small private car, and liquid hydrogen (LH2) doesn't keep long. The huge mass penalty associated with economical H2 storage seems likely to keep the mileage of fuel-cell-powered automobiles (of acceptable range, acceleration, cost, and cargo capacity) below 25 miles per kg of H2 for many decades.

Current U.S. H2 production is enormous--about 2 x 1010 kg per year. Yet the current pretax cost of LH2, delivered in 15,000-gal (4,300-kg) tankers to high-volume customers, is $4.30 per kg, and other methods of H2 distribution are even more expensive. On the other hand, the current U.S. pretax cost of gasoline for the individual consumer at the local station is about 30 cents per kg.

The only economically viable sources of H2 in the U.S. are natural gas and coal. The nearly adiabatic partial-oxidation/reformation/shift reactions use 3 kg of natural gas (90% CH4) to produce 1 kg of H2 plus 9.5 kg of CO2. Then more than 3 kg of coal must be burned (releasing another 10 kg of CO2) to generate the 10 kWh (36 MJ) needed to purify and liquefy 1 kg of H2. The energy efficiency in producing LH2 is under 50%. (This number has not budged in 15 years and will not in the next 50. We're near Carnot limits.) The energy content of 1 kg of H2 is equivalent to 2.8 kg (1.1 gal) of gasoline, which contains only 2.3 kg of carbon.

At 80 miles per gallon, the advanced diesel hybrid achieves 7 miles per kg of total CO2. The fuel-cell automobile at 25 miles per kg of hydrogen achieves 1.1-1.3 miles per kg of total CO2. Hence, when miles per kg of CO2 release ("fossil mileage") is more fairly calculated, the total CO2 generated per mile by a hydrogen vehicle is likely to be five times that of a comparable diesel-powered hybrid vehicle for at least four decades.

The problem is that it isn't possible to produce the hydrogen for less energy than it will generate.

That's not necessarily a problem, if the energy used would otherwise go to waste.

It isn't possible to produce AA batteries for less energy than the AA battery will generate, either, but AA batteries seem to be plenty commercially viable. That's because there is no more viable alternative for a small, portable energy source. There are, however, more viable alternatives for transportable liquid or gaseous fuels - e.g. gasoline, diesel, CNG, etc.

Iceland are taking steps to convert all of their road vehicles to hydrogen. They can do this as their nation is small and because they have abundant natural energy going to waste from the volcanic activity in the area.

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:clMF98gHmsEJ:www.rescorp.org/science%2520frontiers/gray.pdf is a good example of the thinking by hydrogen fans. Really fantastic technical advances coupled to complete ignorance of macro-economics. Basically, "technology will save us, technology will save us all" meanwhile millions of people are dying all around us and nobody is lifting a finger.

For more on Fuel Cells -- http://www.mcb3.com/click.asp?x=c0cb.209c.2363129

Reports:

National Hydrogen Energy Roadmap -- Pdf Document available for download - Nearly 60 pages -(approx 2 MB)

  http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/national_h2_roadmap.pdf

Fuel Cell Report to Congress -- Also available as a PDF Document (approx 1.8 MB)

  http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/fc_report_congress_feb2003.pdf