HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » Hydrogen cost could equal...

Fri Aug 19, 2016, 08:09 PM

Hydrogen cost could equal 50-cent gasoline, with renewable energy: study

Green Car Reports, August 19, 2016 by Stephen Edelstein

Hydrogen fuel-cell cars face an uphill battle toward mass adoption.

Both cars and fueling infrastructure need to be made widely available before large numbers of consumers can seriously consider switching from gasoline to hydrogen.


Photovoltaic Solar Power Field at Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee

But under certain circumstances, hydrogen could prove very attractive to consumers for one simple reason.

When produced using renewable energy, hydrogen could cost nearly the equivalent of 50-cent-per-gallon gasoline, according to a study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)...snip

...The NREL plan assumes large-scale production of hydrogen through electrolysis, but with renewable energy used to provide the majority of electricity in place of fuels that produce high levels of carbon emissions...snip

...Renewable sources could generate as much as 80 percent of U.S. electricity by 2050 using currently-available technology, according to NREL data.

The NREL argues that excess electricity generated by these renewable sources could be used to produce cheap hydrogen...snip
Read More: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1105642_hydrogen-cost-could-equal-50-cent-gasoline-with-renewable-energy-study

ROFL- Even Green Car Reports.com is starting to get it!

Who's killing the Hydrogen Car?


Green Hydrogen=Jobs




20 replies, 1442 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 20 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hydrogen cost could equal 50-cent gasoline, with renewable energy: study (Original post)
nationalize the fed Aug 2016 OP
MichiganVote Aug 2016 #1
NNadir Aug 2016 #3
tonyt53 Aug 2016 #2
NNadir Aug 2016 #4
OKIsItJustMe Aug 2016 #9
LWolf Aug 2016 #5
progressoid Aug 2016 #6
caraher Aug 2016 #7
OKIsItJustMe Aug 2016 #10
caraher Aug 2016 #13
OKIsItJustMe Aug 2016 #14
OKIsItJustMe Aug 2016 #11
caraher Aug 2016 #12
OKIsItJustMe Aug 2016 #15
OKIsItJustMe Aug 2016 #16
NNadir Aug 2016 #17
progree Aug 2016 #18
NNadir Aug 2016 #19
NickB79 Aug 2016 #8
mackdaddy Aug 2016 #20

Response to nationalize the fed (Original post)


Response to MichiganVote (Reply #1)

Fri Aug 19, 2016, 10:36 PM

3. Actually, since so called "renewable energy" is an expensive failure...

...belief in this kind of crap is doing exactly that.

We just spent two trillion bucks on the useless solar and wind junk in the last ten years, with the result that for the first time in recorded history we are now exceeding 3.00 ppm increases in carbon dioxide per year.

The wind and solar industry are entirely and completely dependent on access to dangerous fossil fuels, cannot produce even 5 of the 570 exajoules of energy humanity consumes each year, and all of this thermodynamic ignorance about stupid schemes like hydrogen are making the situation far worse.

So called "renewable energy" hasn't worked, isn't working and won't work.

That's not sarcasm; it's a fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Original post)

Fri Aug 19, 2016, 09:15 PM

2. I'm a strong supporter of alternative and renewable fuels, but hydrogen scares the hell out of me.

 

Extremely flammable and with a ruptured tank of hydrogen, even a small amount, you have a bomb on wheels. Yeah, I know about the tanks on natural gas vehicles and their supposed burst ratings. But let a fire come in contact with the tank and the heat greatly increases the pressure. I saw one of the water produced hydrogen cutting torch units about 25 years ago. Those things produce only enough hydrogen to keep the flame going. A car can't operate like that with accelerating and slowing down. A storage tank will have to be utilized.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tonyt53 (Reply #2)

Fri Aug 19, 2016, 10:40 PM

4. Don't worry about it. People have been running this hydrogen scam for generations.

It's mostly the province of people who have never passed an engineering course or a course in thermodynamics.

We have lots of ways to waste energy, and we do waste energy, but very little energy is actually wasted on producing hydrogen, except for captive use.

That shit-for-brains former Governor of California, Arnie Schwartenegger, was driving around in his idiot hydrogen Hummer. How many hydrogen cars are tooling around California today as a result of his enthusiasm?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tonyt53 (Reply #2)

Sat Aug 20, 2016, 06:06 PM

9. Do you trust gasoline-powered cars?

Due to the relative inefficiency of an internal combustion engine, a “standard” automobile needs to carry much more energy in its tank (in the form of gasoline) than a hydrogen/fuel-cell vehicle. Gasoline powered cars have been known to catch fire on occasion as well.

Here we have intentionally set fires, one of a car with a hydrogen tank, and one one of a car with a gasoline tank.

http://www.40fires.org/Wiki.jsp?page=Hydrogen%20Safety%20-%205.%20Gasoline%20Vs.%20Hydrogen
[center]
[font size=1]Figure 1 - Left: 3 seconds after ignition. Centre: 1 minute after ignition. Right: 1.5 minutes after ignition.[/font][/center]

https://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/30535be.pdf


Gasoline leakage: the fuel line of a gasoline fueled vehicle was punctured with 1/16 inch diameter hole and gasoline leaks out of the fuel line under the middle of the car. During the 3.5 minutes of videotaping, the vehicle leaks five pints of gasoline (approximately 70,000 BTU). Several events of interest occur including a deflagration of gases inside the vehicle interior and trunk, ruptures of the vehicle's tires, and an unrestrained release of coolant from the air conditioner. These should be described in the narration.

Hydrogen leakage: the hydrogen-fueled vehicle was designed consistent with existing manufacturer specifications. They include sensors for hydrogen that activate shut-off solenoids in the hydrogen tank, and computer programming to shut off fuel supply if fuel flow exceeds that used by the fuel cell, or fuel flow delivered drops by a predetermined amount. In light of the additional safety precautions designed into hydrogen-fueled vehicles the most severe single failure mode accident scenario is that of hydrogen leakage at the tank pressure release device (PRD) causing a standing flame, which in turn causes the PRD to allow all the hydrogen in the tank to escape in 100 seconds. During the video, the hydrogen vehicle leaks 3.4 pounds of hydrogen (approximately 175,000 BTU).

For hydrogen to leak under a hydrogen-powered vehicle in amounts that would produce a severe accident four failures, must occur. They are:
  1. Fuel line or component sealing failure.
  2. The hydrogen sensor system that detects hydrogen and shuts off hydrogen flow must fail.
  3. The tank mounted excess flow valve required by manufacturers specifications must fail.
  4. Flow sensing computer programs, that compare hydrogen flow to hydrogen consumption of the fuel cell, must fail.

Other failures could disable some of the above-mentioned systems but no single failure mode could produce a severe hydrogen leak under the vehicle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Original post)

Fri Aug 19, 2016, 10:47 PM

5. That's why we

should have already started putting in the infrastructure. This needed to be fast-tracked; instead, the oil industry wants to make sure we've extracted and burned every last drop of fossil fuel, and then that they own whatever source is next, before we can move forward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Original post)

Sat Aug 20, 2016, 12:43 AM

6. "When produced using renewable energy"

That's a pretty big assumption. We're at like 12% renewable today?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #6)

Sat Aug 20, 2016, 10:21 AM

7. And it's even worse than that

Given that you've produced said renewable energy, forming the hydrogen and then recombining with oxygen in the fuel cells are two independent steps, neither of which is terribly efficient. You wind up throwing most of that energy away.

At least using that renewable energy to charge a battery you can easily use 80-85% of it to move a vehicle (limited mainly by charging efficiency). With fuel cells, we'll be lucky if the two steps (electrolysis and fuel cell operation) ever reach 70% each, guaranteeing the loss of half the energy by the time you take that renewable energy and put it to use.

There will likely be circumstances where that loss does not matter, but since battery EVs already perform well enough to meet the needs of most drivers in daily use, electricity distribution infrastructure actually exists, and the overall process is more efficient, a big push for hydrogen right now would mainly have the effect of supporting and expanding the continued extraction of the fossil hydrocarbons that will remain the chief source of hydrogen for the foreseeable future. Using renewable energy for transportation doesn't have to wait for a less-efficient infrastructure to be created.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caraher (Reply #7)

Sat Aug 20, 2016, 06:22 PM

10. Or maybe not

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2015/ee/c4ee04041d
[font face=Serif][font size=5]Hydrogen or batteries for grid storage? A net energy analysis†[/font]



Received 22nd December 2014 , Accepted 8th April 2015

First published on the web 8th April 2015



[font size=3]Energy storage is a promising approach to address the challenge of intermittent generation from renewables on the electric grid. In this work, we evaluate energy storage with a regenerative hydrogen fuel cell (RHFC) using net energy analysis. We examine the most widely installed RHFC configuration, containing an alkaline water electrolyzer and a PEM fuel cell. To compare RHFC's to other storage technologies, we use two energy return ratios: the electrical energy stored on invested (ESOI[sub]e[/sub]) ratio (the ratio of electrical energy returned by the device over its lifetime to the electrical-equivalent energy required to build the device) and the overall energy efficiency (the ratio of electrical energy returned by the device over its lifetime to total lifetime electrical-equivalent energy input into the system). In our reference scenario, the RHFC system has an ESOI[sub]e[/sub] ratio of 59, more favorable than the best battery technology available today (Li-ion, ESOI[sub]e[/sub] = 35). (In the reference scenario RHFC, the alkaline electrolyzer is 70% efficient and has a stack lifetime of 100[thin space (1/6-em)]000 h; the PEM fuel cell is 47% efficient and has a stack lifetime of 10 000 h; and the round-trip efficiency is 30%.) The ESOI[sub]e[/sub] ratio of storage in hydrogen exceeds that of batteries because of the low energy cost of the materials required to store compressed hydrogen, and the high energy cost of the materials required to store electric charge in a battery. However, the low round-trip efficiency of a RHFC energy storage system results in very high energy costs during operation, and a much lower overall energy efficiency than lithium ion batteries (0.30 for RHFC, vs. 0.83 for lithium ion batteries). RHFC's represent an attractive investment of manufacturing energy to provide storage. On the other hand, their round-trip efficiency must improve dramatically before they can offer the same overall energy efficiency as batteries, which have round-trip efficiencies of 75–90%. One application of energy storage that illustrates the tradeoff between these different aspects of energy performance is capturing overgeneration (spilled power) for later use during times of peak output from renewables. We quantify the relative energetic benefit of adding different types of energy storage to a renewable generating facility using (EROI)[sub]grid[/sub]. Even with 30% round-trip efficiency, RHFC storage achieves the same (EROI)[sub]grid[/sub] as batteries when storing overgeneration from wind turbines, because its high ESOI[sub]e[/sub] ratio and the high EROI of wind generation offset the low round-trip efficiency.

…[/font][/font]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #10)

Sat Aug 20, 2016, 11:39 PM

13. I don't see the immediate relevance to transportation, the subject of the OP

I certainly recognized in my post that what the paper you link calls round-trip efficiency won't always be the most important consideration, and that creates some niches for fuel cells.

Also, am I understanding this analysis correctly? What it tells me is that under a certain range of circumstances, for wind specifically (because the energy investment in producing both the turbines and the RHFC systems and associated hydrogen storage is very low), a fuel cell-based storage system could be advantageous. It's not entirely obvious whether those circumstances obtain in most cases or in exceptional cases (I would need to spend more time picking through their analysis than I can devote now to be sure which).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caraher (Reply #13)

Sun Aug 21, 2016, 09:04 PM

14. Relevance to the OP

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2015/ee/c4ee04041d
[font face=Serif][font size=5]Hydrogen or batteries for grid storage? A net energy analysis†[/font]

[font size=3]…

Regenerative hydrogen fuel cells (RHFC's) have several characteristics that are well-suited to large-scale energy storage. They are not subject to geological requirements, which are important restrictions on pumped hydro and compressed air storage. The energy capacity and power capacity of a regenerative fuel cell can be configured independently. Storing energy in hydrogen provides a dramatically higher energy density than any other energy storage medium.[sup]8,10[/sup] Hydrogen is also a flexible energy storage medium which can be used in stationary fuel cells (electricity only or combined heat and power),[sup]12,14[/sup] internal combustion engines,[sup]12,15,16[/sup] or fuel cell vehicles.[sup]17–20[/sup] Hydrogen storage has a very low rate of self-discharge, and has therefore been proposed for seasonal storage.[sup]8,21[/sup] The cost of energy storage in a regenerative hydrogen fuel cell is already potentially competitive with batteries in an optimized energy arbitrage system.[sup]22[/sup] Several dozen RHFC projects have already implemented hydrogen storage, spanning a wide range of energy and power capacities (Fig. 2).[sup]12[/sup] The most common configuration among existing systems contains an alkaline water electrolyzer (AWE) and a polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell (PEMFC).‡



Finally, although the present analysis is restricted to systems that use hydrogen exclusively to produce electricity, there are several other possible uses for stored hydrogen. These include filling fuel cell vehicles, enriching the natural gas distribution system, local industrial consumption, and production of synthetic fuels. A flexible supply installation that can dispense hydrogen to multiple end uses may achieve a better net energy outcome than any single-use configuration. Net energy analysis of these other applications of grid-generated hydrogen, and of optimized flexible use, remains for future work.

[font size=4]5 Conclusion[/font]
Energy storage in hydrogen is a technically feasible option for grid-scale storage, and is already in pilot demonstrations. Because of its low round-trip efficiency, it may be overlooked in spite of its potential advantages, such as high energy density and low rate of self-discharge. In order to examine the potential benefits and drawbacks of hydrogen as a grid-scale energy storage technology, we apply net energy analysis to a representative hypothetical regenerative hydrogen fuel cell (RHFC) system. We introduce and apply a method to determine the energy stored on invested (ESOI[sub]e[/sub]) ratio of a reference case RHFC system.

We find that the reference case RHFC system has a higher ESOI[sub]e[/sub] ratio than lithium ion battery storage. This indicates that the hydrogen storage system makes more efficient use of manufacturing energy inputs to provide energy storage. One reason for this is that the steel used to fabricate a compressed hydrogen storage cylinder is less energetically costly, per unit of stored energy, than the materials that store electric charge in a battery (electrode paste, electrolyte, and separator). However, lithium ion batteries remain energetically preferable when considering the operation of the system, as well as its manufacture, due to their higher round-trip efficiency (90%). This is reflected in the overall energy efficiencies of the two storage technologies: the overall energy efficiency of a typical lithium ion battery system is 0.83, compared to 0.30 for the reference case RHFC system. This highlights that in spite of its relatively efficient use of manufacturing energy inputs, the round-trip efficiency of a RHFC system must increase before it can provide the same total energy benefit as other storage technologies. Higher RHFC round-trip efficiency relies on improved electrolyzer and fuel cell performance.

…[/font][/font]


Given what you present as the horrible inefficiency of hydrogen production and use, it seems odd that it would be attractive at all for any application, especially stationary!

The thing which some people fail to recognize (or prefer not to acknowledge) is that there are some clear advantages to hydrogen fuel cells over batteries for use in vehicles. (NASA understood this decades ago.) (PDF)

The Tesla Model S has a half ton battery to haul around. The Mirai’s “Fuel cell stack weight is 123.5 lbs (56 kg), while the hydrogen tank’s weight is 192.9 lbs (87.5 kg).” (The weight of the hydrogen itself is negligible.)

OK, so, less weight, shorter “recharge time”, with greater range… potentially, less cost. (Today, Toyota’s fuel cell is relatively expensive.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caraher (Reply #7)

Sat Aug 20, 2016, 07:46 PM

11. Or maybe not

http://www.energy-storage.news/news/rwe-launches-power-to-gas-storage-system
[font face=Serif][font size=5]RWE launches power-to-gas storage system[/font]

By John Parnell | Aug 20, 2015 12:30 PM BST

[font size=3]German utility firm RWE has launched a power-to-gas storage system, which it claims has achieved efficiencies as high as 86%.

The plant uses excess electricity from the local grid to create hydrogen via an electrolyser bult by UK firm ITM Power. The hydrogen is pumped into the natural gas network and heat from the process is drawn by a district heating system. The hydrogen can be called on to generate power when it is needed.

The plant in Ibbenbüren North Rhine Westphalia (NRW) could be the first of many with RWE executives lining up to extol its virtues.


[font size=1]The plant in Ibbenbüren North Rhine Westphalia (NRW) could be the first of many. Source: ITM Power[/font]

“In order to be able to pick up excess electricity from renewable sources onto our grid, we need alternatives to conventional grid expansion methods. This was the driving force behind our decision to embrace this new technology,” said Dr Joachim Schneider, CTO, RWE Deutschland. “The hydrogen that is created by electrolysis can be stored and later used to generate power. The benefit of this form of electricity storage is the enormous infrastructure already offered by the natural gas network – which has huge storage capacity and a high-performing network.”

…[/font][/font]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #11)

Sat Aug 20, 2016, 11:37 PM

12. That 86% figure is pretty squirrely

I found one paywalled journal article related to this project and otherwise a bunch of press releases and articles based on them. It is apparently achieved because their not looking at the energy in electricity but thermal energy. In fact, a big part of their pitch is really about the ability to feed hydrogen into natural gas systems at low concentrations, using it to make methane, district heating systems, etc. in addition to doing things like filling hydrogen car fuel tanks. The 86% is an "energy utilization rate" that isn't rigorously defined in any source I've been able to track down.

I don't think that figure describes what happens to the transportation use of renewable energy to produce hydrogen, which was the subject of the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caraher (Reply #12)

Sun Aug 21, 2016, 09:07 PM

15. Do other forms of recovered energy not count then?

Cogeneration is a technology used with standard combustion to increase our efficiency in using energy (why not with fuel cells as well?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to caraher (Reply #12)

Sun Aug 21, 2016, 09:10 PM

16. Southeast Asia’s First Renewable Hydrogen-Based Energy Storage and Power Plant Awarded to Hydrogeni…

http://www.hydrogenics.com/about-the-company/news-updates/2016/07/21/southeast-asia-s-first-renewable-hydrogen-based-energy-storage-and-power-plant-awarded-to-hydrogenics
[font face=Serif]Jul 21, 2016
[font size=5]Southeast Asia’s First Renewable Hydrogen-Based Energy Storage and Power Plant Awarded to Hydrogenics[/font]

[font size=3]Mississauga, Ontario – July 21, 2016 – Hydrogenics Corporation (NASDAQ:HYGS; TSX:HYG) (“Hydrogenics” or the “Company”), a leading developer and manufacturer of hydrogen generation technology and hydrogen fuel cell power modules, today announced that it, along with Phraram 2 Civil Engineering Co., Ltd. (“PCE”), has been awarded the “Lam Takhong Wind Hydrogen Hybrid Project” by the Electricity Generation Authority of Thailand (EGAT). This will be Southeast Asia’s first megawatt-scale project for energy storage; Hydrogenics’ portion is projected to be worth approximately €4.3 million.

The facility, located in the sub-station area of the Lam Takhong Wind Turbine Generation Project, Nakhon Ratchasima Province, Thailand, will consist of Hydrogenics’ ultra-compact 1 MW PEM HyLyzer® electrolyzer, hydrogen storage and a HyPM® fuel cell plant. PCE, based in Bangkok, will provide the services required to implement the technology supplied by Hydrogenics.

The installation will use the HyLyzer to convert excess electricity from wind to hydrogen during off-peak hours, and this hydrogen will then be used by the HyPM fuel cell plant to generate 300kW of electricity for EGAT’s Learning Center, an energy neutral building, as needed.

“We are pleased to work with the Electricity Generation Authority of Thailand and bring our unique hydrogen technology to this milestone project,” stated Daryl Wilson, Hydrogenics’ CEO and President. “There is great untapped potential for wind and solar energy storage worldwide, and Thailand is leading the path towards sustainability in Southeast Asia. This project once again shows the breadth and depth of Hydrogenics’ energy solutions for a diverse set of applications across the globe.”

…[/font][/font]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #16)

Sun Aug 21, 2016, 10:18 PM

17. We're over 400 ppm of CO2 permanently and we're still focusing on this piddling...

...garage scale bullshit?

Firsts?

How about lasts?

The last time we will ever see carbon dioxide readings below 400 ppm is already in the past, and still we have people paying attention - as if it fucking mattered a whit - about a fucking single megawatt thermodynamic nightmare storage device.

Right now, human energy consumption is at more than 570 exajoules per year. This translates into an average continuous power demand of 18 million watts.

This appalling lack of a sense of scale on the part of the wishful thinking that has caused humanity to invest heavily, and uselessly, on unsustainable junk that has not worked, is not working, and will not work.

This crap was failing at Utsira a decade ago, and still, we have people repeating the experiment endlessly hoping that they'll get a different result.

It's pure idiocy, a crime against the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNadir (Reply #17)

Tue Aug 23, 2016, 02:02 AM

18. 18 trillion watts (18 million megawatts) for a year = 570 exajoules, I think

Right now, human energy consumption is at more than 570 exajoules per year. This translates into an average continuous power demand of 18 million watts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progree (Reply #18)

Tue Aug 23, 2016, 06:41 AM

19. You are correct. In my anger at the stupidity of the post, I left out the "Mega" prefix...

...on the "Watts."

This obviously makes the situation even worse, by a factor of one million.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nationalize the fed (Original post)

Sat Aug 20, 2016, 01:07 PM

8. So in 30 years, hydrogen cars might be as cheap to drive as electric cars are today???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #8)

Tue Aug 23, 2016, 02:19 PM

20. Only if there are no improvements in battery storage technology over that 30 years..

But I have seen several deploy-able new battery technologies in the last few months.

If batteries can be recharged in the 5-10 minute time frame, and the weight and energy density continue to improve, Hydrogen & fuel cells will have a hard time catching up for this applications.

And there will be billions needed in infrastructure build out for hydrogen.

But Hydrogen is a way for the current HydroCarbon corporations to keep their monopoly power going for a few more decades. If we are still here to worry about it of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread